On Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:48:01 +0200, stephane ducasse wrote:

> Sure!
> But I understand what Bryce concerns.

And neither the concerns of Bryce nor your's (someone alone could  
understand smalltalk) can be generalized. But thanks to Squeak, such  
different concerns can be addressed very conveniently :)

> Now if we would start to really benchmark central part of squeak I'm  
> sure that we would get some surprises.

What do you expect, are there areas which are important for your work to  
be benchmarked.

/Klaus

> Stef
>
>
> On 18 sept. 06, at 11:17, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>