Porting Squeak

Giovanni Giorgi jj at objectsroot.com
Sun Jan 13 19:17:56 UTC 2002


John Hinsley <jhinsley at telinco.co.uk> wrote:
>There are some really nice examples in there: thanks! I've never been
>convinced by the speed argument, especially as far as Java is concerned:
>just compare Borland's Java IDE (allegedly written in Java) with Squeak
>or with the IBM Java IDE (allegedly written partly in Smalltalk). From

John.Maloney at disney.com wrote:
>We also preferred the Smalltalk "image model" to Java's
>edit-compile-run model of program development. It seemed much
>better for a kids programming environment.

I have used java in a medium sized project (http://panama.sol-tec.it) of
trading on line.
I think Java is not so fast (Squeak could be faster....and Morph is
faster then Swing but... Swing are Just in time compiled...!).
I have seen my colleagues with some problem using Java because of the
wait-javac-compiling cycle (edit-compile-run....) and for the lack of
templates...
Wrost, strong typing is less userfyl using EJB or some very very
powerful java technology.

The wrost problem of squeak is lack of name spaces, in my own opinon.
Speed is not a problem...but costs for developement is.
Smalltalk is easier to use than java, so you get a more productive
environment.
ciao ciao




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list