Hi Stef,

on Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:11:16 +0200, you wrote:
> me too :)
> I always have in mind the nice sentence of dan about the fact that  
> someone alone could understand smalltalk

Look into data centres where the big servers run applications or look into  
offices where thousands of workstations run applications.

If you can save them a significant portion of CPU time then you save them  
$$$ investment, and perhaps win a contract against your competitor.

Also, look into complex applications which can neither be created nor be  
maintained by a single person, or understood by a single person.

Why shouldn't Squeak become a #1 choice in such situations.

I doubt that application developers want to understand the internals of a  
VM or the internals of a library (Collections in our case here, libc as an  
example in other cases), perhaps their boss (the $$$ decision maker) also  
doesn't want that. I doubt because of long time experience.

Let's bring Squeak to the masses. Or, am I wrong with this? I run a  
commercial business and want to base my success on Squeak. Anyone out  
there telling me that I should not invest into Squeak, please let me know,  
in squeak-dev or off-list. Thank you.

Please don't misunderstand: I'm not asking that primitiveApplyToFromTo  
must be in each and every VM. Neither do I have something against the  
preferences of developers. But I want freedom for making decisions.

/Klaus

> On 17 sept. 06, at 22:04, Bryce Kampjes wrote:
>
>> Personally, I'd prefer a library that I can easily understand that is
>> fast enough for 99% of it's uses. That for 1% of cases, I need to use
>> a custom solution is an acceptable trade off for understandability.
>
>
>