On 12 February 2014 00:22, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>
> On 11-02-2014, at 5:02 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr. <jecel at merlintec.com> wrote:
>
>> Any discussion of what is Smalltalk and what isn't can't get very far
>> without first clearly defining a few things.
>
> In the same way that Filk is music performed by people that consider themselves to be Filkers, I would suggest that maybe Smalltalk is what is written by people that consider themselves to be Smalltalkers.
>
> Is everything an object? Do objects have classes? Do objects communicate by sending messages and getting back results? Is an image saved and restarted? Can you forget about having to deal with memory allocation? If the answer is yes to those questions then it’s probably a Smalltalk.

Of course, this makes Common Lisp a Smalltalk :) (They certainly have
a whole bunch of characteristics in common, which given Smalltalk's
influences should not be a surprise.) (And no, I don't seriously
consider Common Lisp a Smalltalk, just in case anyone thinks that I
do.)

> Oh and course the big one - do I like it?

Why, yes I do! (To both!)

frank