On 07/02/2008, Paul D. Fernhout <pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com> wrote:
> Interesting, but I feel there is simply a big difference in project risk
> between basing new work on a VM like the JVM that has been under development
> for ten or fifteen years and has tons of software for it versus basing a
> project on alpha software which doesn't do anything that much different. Of
> course, people will now feel free to quote that back to me for anything *I*
> do (including a Smalltalk/JVM. :-) Which is why new ideas have at best a few
> lukewarm friends and many staunch enemies (Machiavelli?).
>

Reminds me a google mail, refusing to send mail with .exe file
attached to it, because it's risky.
Smalltalk have more than 30 years development history, so by taking
your argument, i would say, that developing on java is a bit risky
comparing to smalltalk.

> Also, there are a lot less users and developers for the GNUStep platform
> (even if we include Mac OS X developers, although there are slight
> differences).  Still, I have on-and-off considered GNUStep. Lots of good
> things about it. It never really clicked for me, despite multiple tries over
> many years. And even if GNUStep runs on "windows, mac, and linux", I wonder
> (from previous reading on it) how *well* it runs on those platforms. So for
> me, the JVM still makes a lot more sense. If this Smalltalk/JVM continues to
> proceed at a slow pace, then when the software you link to has been around
> for a year or two, then I might more strongly consider it. For me, I know a
> lot about Java software libraries and that ecosystem (including Jython), but
> I know very little about GNUStep libraries. I know the JVM works fairly well
> by now even if it still has problems here and there. If I was a GNUStep
> developer, with a good knowledge of GNUStep libraries, then maybe I'd want
> to invest my time in that direction. Same if I was a mono developer.
>

The difference between us, that i try product and make my own opinion
what it's worth, i don't care what people say.
See, many people saying that Windows Vista is groovy, but it having
zero chances to be installed on my desktop. I have an
environmentalistic attitude and don't feel that drawing beautiful
icons/windows worth burning twice more oil on power plant.


> Ideally, a future Squeak might evolve to such a high level of abstraction
> that it could retarget itself for multiple such platforms -- jvm, mono,
> GNUstep, Lazarus, plain old GNU/Linux+GTK, or bare to the metal.  But it
> sure seems easier at first for me with limited time and resources to just
> pick one widely used platform which runs on mac, PC, GNU/Linux (like the
> JVM) and leverage it. Of course, then it's not clear if the incremental
> value of a more dynamic language like Smalltalk over, say, Jython, is worth
> the effort. Still, a lot of new things get made because they are interesting
> and fun or for other personal reasons, not that they are always the best
> investment. :-)
>
> --Paul Fernhout
>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.