Article View: net.lang.st80
Article #355Re: Smalltalk implementation on Sun's
From: Tim Rentsch
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1986 07:01
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1986 07:01
28 lines
1494 bytes
1494 bytes
Here at UNC we have used both the Berkeley and Xerox PS
interpreters, and on both sun-2's and sun-3's. I would judge the
performance as follows:
Berkeley ("bs")
Sun-2 barely tolerable
Sun-3 reasonable
Xerox PS
Sun-2 reasonable
Sun-3 excellent
To be fair to Berkeley Smalltalk, I would say that it is better
integrated into Unix (uses Unix new lines, unlike Xerox PS which
uses carriage returns), and is in some sense a better experimental
tool since the interpreter source code is available. (We do not
have source code for the Xerox PS interpreter here at UNC, although
I suppose some sites do.)
Since we have gone through the exercise here of getting around
various shortcomings in the Xerox PS interpreter, I was planning on
posting some bug fixes and goodies to the net. Is anyone out there
interested, or will I just be wasting my time?
cheers,
Tim Rentsch
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<106@unc.unc.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!husc6!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!mcnc!unc!rentschReferences:
<7120@boring.mcvax.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!rutgers!husc6!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!mcnc!unc!rentsch From: rentsch@unc.UUCP (Tim Rentsch) Newsgroups: net.lang.st80 Subject: Re: Smalltalk implementation on Sun's Message-ID: <106@unc.unc.UUCP> Date: Mon, 27-Oct-86 02:01:36 EST Article-I.D.: unc.106 Posted: Mon Oct 27 02:01:36 1986 Date-Received: Mon, 27-Oct-86 22:29:14 EST References: <7120@boring.mcvax.UUCP> Reply-To: rentsch@unc.UUCP (Tim Rentsch) Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill Lines: 28