Diego Gomez Deck wrote:

> Hi guys,

 >>

>> I found the type-system the most unnatural part about StrongTalk. It
>> feels displaced and if you look at methods like "->" in Object you can
>> see that there are some rather nasty complexities associated with it
>> (not to mention readability issues).
> 
> 
> Before your message I was so depressed because I felt alone   :-P
> 
> ( Andreas, we are on the same side this time  =o) )
> 
> To say the true, the only thing I like about StrongTalk is the dynamic 
> compiler. The other unnatural thing is the absence of an image.



Don't feel alone, because I feel the same way.

I came to Smalltalk from Objective-C, where typing is optional.  I think 
optional typing is occasionally useful, but highly overrated, and 
supporting it introduces a lot of other issues and complexities that I 
really don't care for.

Come to think of it, though, that's exactly what I think of another 
often touted feature of the static languages computer camp:  multiple 
inheritance.  Multiple inheritance is also occasionally useful, but 
highly overrated, and supporting it introduces a lot of other issues and 
complexities that I don't care for.

As to the performance increases that StrongTalk can help provide, there 
are other options.  The performance of the latest VisualWorks release 
(7.0) is a strong example of what can be done without going to typing.

Nevin