Smalltalk and Java
philippe.marschall at gmail.com
Sun Nov 11 20:25:48 UTC 2007
2007/11/11, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
> Cees de Groot wrote:
> > On Nov 10, 2007 12:13 AM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> >> Yes, I understand the same. And I wish it were different...
> > Why - because Microsoft is The Bad Guy and Sun is The Good Guy?
> No, it's because I need to run on a variety of platforms and I need
> cross-platform libraries to work with.
What's wrong with Squeak?
> The last time I checked both
> wasn't the case for .NET and both was the case for Java. Other than that
> I don't care very much although MS' stance on Mono and patents does
> nothing to convince me that the patent suits won't hit the fan at some
> - Andreas
> > We have two power houses in a battle for who can produce the best
> > generic virtual machine. Dynamic languages are on the rise, I bet that
> > dynamic language support will be way way better in 1-2 years in the
> > JVM simply because the Jay guys can't sit still while the Dot guys are
> > extending the functionality of their platform. The major IDE out there
> > (I think), Eclipse, starts to look and feel more and more like a
> > Smalltalk environment, and in some respects even better (with all the
> > static type info, the RB on Eclipse rocks!).
> > I think we, the Dynamic OO Language Bunch, are doing quite well, actually ;)
> > But getting back on topic: I have seen a handful of Smalltalk-on-JVM
> > implementations, and they all sucked performance-wise. I wouldn't
> > spend a lot of time doing yet another attempt until JVM support got
> > better, and until that time if it is for phones, you're screwed, learn
> > Java, if it is for research, .NET might be the thing.
More information about the Squeak-dev