Smalltalk: Requiem or Resurgence? {Dr. Dobb's Journal
(05/06/06) Chan, Jeremy}
stéphane ducasse
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Thu May 11 12:47:09 UTC 2006
Yes!
I think that avi and colin are giving us a lesson: seaside, MC, OB
We should not let them alone invent the future!
Stef
> People keep mentioning technical aspects of Smalltalk as being the
> ones that will make people want to use it. Technologists are
> interested in technology, so this is not surprising. However, people
> are more important than technology. If Smalltalk is going to have a
> resurgence, the people who know and love Smalltalk will have to make
> it happen. It isn't going to happen automatically. Jeremy Chan is
> right to emphasize people problems like "no big company is pushing
> it".
>
> Every tool has its stengths and weaknesses. To make Small prosper,
> people should use it where it works and not use it where it doesn't
> work. Smalltalk is fantastic in small groups of motivated
> programmers. It is not so good in large groups with high turnover.
> People seem to get excited about large Smalltalk projects, and to long
> for the days of ten years ago when there were 100 person projects. In
> my opinion, those projects were never run well, and were probably all
> a mistake. Many of them were successful in the sense of bringing a
> product to market, but all the ones I saw could have been done faster
> and cheaper with a smaller team.
>
> Smalltalk fans ought to go start companies. Smalltalk has lots of
> advantages in a startup, where it is important to get something
> running quickly and where compatibility with existing systems is not
> so important. It doesn't work as well in a big company, where it is
> iimportant to play it safe and there are existing standards and lots
> of existing systems.
>
> Smalltalk is a wonderful language both for teaching and for research.
> I've always wondered why it did so poorly in universities. I think
> that one of the reasons is that it is hard to learn. There are too
> many things about Smalltalk that are new. The language is easy, but
> the class libraries are large, and the programming environment is
> different from what people are used to. People are not used to "live
> objects" and do not know how to take advantage of them. The class
> library is not modularized, so it is hard for newcomers to see what to
> learn first.
>
> Smalltalk is pretty easy to learn if you are pair programming with an
> expert whose main goal is for you to learn, not to build a system. It
> is hard to learn from a book and from experimentation. I taught
> myself Smalltalk 20 years ago and have since taught it to a thousand
> or so students. I tell my students that they all will learn Smalltalk
> faster than I did, because they will have a teacher. This is not 100%
> true, since some students didn't try very hard. But it is pretty easy
> to learn when you have a teacher who knows Smalltalk well. One of the
> problems with getting it used in schools is that somebody has to teach
> the teachers.
>
> So, if you want to help Smalltalk spread, sit down and program with
> a newbie!
>
> -Ralph Johnson
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|