Yes, please, don't argue, I was pulling your leg ;)
What I generally say is that Smalltalk is the most functional object
oriented language (intentionally ignoring Scala)
However optimization would require knowledge of state mutation (or absence
of) and I don't see anything easy on that front...


2013/4/28 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>

> I don't really have the energy for re-arguing that point. In summary,
> the primary argument against Smalltalk being an FPL is that the
> community doesn't write functional code. Inefficient? Only because
> noone's bothered making it efficient.
>
> So I'm not going to argue any further, and instead continue pushing
> Squeak in the direction of writing code functionally.
>
> (Note that nothing in that SO argument even vaguely touches the actual
> serious stuff, like "classes confound several issues that should be
> orthogonal".)
>
> frank
>
> On 28 April 2013 01:13, Nicolas Cellier
> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ah, yes, in a FPL it's another story...
> > By the way Frank, sorry for
> >
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3527753/why-is-smalltalk-not-a-functional-programming-language
> ,
> > Smalltalk if ever considered as a FPL, would not only be an impure FPL
> but
> > also an inefficient one :(
> >
> >
> > 2013/4/27 Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu>
> >>
> >> On Sat, 27 Apr 2013, Frank Shearar wrote:
> >>
> >>> In Schlemiel's algorithm you have to traverse your string from the
> >>> beginning. Here, the problem is that at every step you're making
> >>> String after String after String that you just throw away.
> >>>
> >>> Unless perhaps you're suggesting that the Schlemielness comes from not
> >>> doing things the way our particular garbage collector like to do
> >>> things?
> >>
> >>
> >> Your code looks right, and works well in a functional programming
> language
> >> which has the required optimizations to run such code efficiently. But
> in
> >> Smalltalk it creates 2n-1 intermediate strings, where the previous is
> the
> >> prefix of the current one, so each one is longer than the previous,
> which
> >> means that O(n^2) bytes are allocated, filled, read once, and then
> garbage
> >> collected. This means that the runtime cost is also O(n^2).
> >>
> >>
> >> Levente
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> frank
> >>>
> >>> On 27 April 2013 22:08, Nicolas Cellier
> >>> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schlemiel_the_Painter%27s_algorithm
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> 2013/4/27 <commits at source.squeak.org>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Levente Uzonyi uploaded a new version of Tests to project The Trunk:
> >>>>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Tests-ul.200.mcz
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ==================== Summary ====================
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Name: Tests-ul.200
> >>>>> Author: ul
> >>>>> Time: 27 April 2013, 10:08:43.206 pm
> >>>>> UUID: dfe70287-0768-42f9-97b7-d7ba6fbd6bb6
> >>>>> Ancestors: Tests-fbs.199
> >>>>>
> >>>>> - avoid suboptimal string concatentation in ReleaseTest >>
> >>>>> #testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals
> >>>>>
> >>>>> =============== Diff against Tests-fbs.199 ===============
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Item was changed:
> >>>>>   ----- Method: ReleaseTest>>testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals (in
> category
> >>>>> 'testing') -----
> >>>>>   testMethodsWithUnboundGlobals
> >>>>>         | unbound |
> >>>>>         unbound := SystemNavigation default
> methodsWithUnboundGlobals.
> >>>>>         Smalltalk cleanOutUndeclared.
> >>>>> +       self assert: unbound isEmpty description: 'Unbound: ',
> unbound
> >>>>> asCommaString!
> >>>>> -       self assert: unbound isEmpty description: ('Unbound: ',
> >>>>> (unbound
> >>>>> reduce: [:acc :each | acc, ', ', each]))!
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20130428/53ddc844/attachment.htm