> >
> >   I still don't know if Squeak qualifies as a "Lightweight Language,"
> > whatever the definition is, but more visibility is better.
>
> Don't you know?  Lightweight means "good" nowadays.  People sprinkle it
> around everywhere.  Frequently it means "doesn't have much code to it"
> (and thus, that it probably consumes heavy CPU and memory), but really,
> it can be applied to anything.
>

    Especially for living objects.

    Ask your family doctor.
    Ask your family rocket scientist.

    True doctors and scientists hate FatLivingObjects.
     (a nightmare to maintain)

    Whitch doctors and scientists  may object.

> Be glad.  It used to be that "object-oriented" meant good.  For example,
> "this is an object-oriented operating system", or "this is an
> object-oriented desktop interface", or "this is an object-oriented
> toaster".
>

    Merely object oriented doesn't buy much nowadays.
    Even a kitchen sink claims to be object oriented.

> Unfortunately, an occasional holdout from the old days will occasionally
> pop up and say "this is a lightweight object-oriented mail reader".
>
> :)
>
> Every field seems to have these things.  And it could be worse --
> education folks have to contend with "child-centered" educational
> techniques.  Blah!
>

    Anyone interested in these things owes it to oneself to have a look at:


http://OpenLivingObjectOrientedLightWeightDbranesForChildrenOfAllAges.OpenStrings.com/D-BranesOS.jar

    It's truly lightweight, merely 100MicroBites (Planck size) in a tiny
jar.

    Cheers,

    SmallSqueak.