From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: James O'Connor Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/26 Message-ID: <32EB753C.678B@jmpstart.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212339380 references: <32DF458F.4D5C@concentric.net> <32DF94DC.6FF8@watson.ibm.com> <32DFD972.37E4@concentric.net> <5bphq4$5js@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <32E05FAF.47BA@concentric.net> to: Robert Dewar content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: JumpStart Systems mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: joconnor@jmpstart.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng x-mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Win95; I) Date: 1997-01-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Robert Dewar wrote: > > Alan says > > "So then, why have so many investment banks adopted Smalltalk as the language > of choice for doing securities trading applications? The reason typically > given is that development speed in Smalltalk is so much faster--which boils > down to big bucks on the trading floor. Could the financial people be wrong?" > > Of course they could .. I know of one major catastrophe in attempting to > use Smalltalk for a large financial application -- which ended up costing > a huge amount of money .... Curious, was the catastophe because of Smalltalk? Or because of bad design/requirements analysis? I would be more inclined to guess the later. Like the Arianne V that blew up awhile back? Wasn't that written in Ada? Was it because it was written in Ada or becuase the designer made a mistake. I would be inclined to think it was the designer's fault, not the languages. > > If you assume that popularity is necessarily related to technical > soundness, no doubt you think that MSDOS was a perfect operating > system, and that Lots 1-2-3 macro language is the best programming > language! I do, however, think that Alan's point is that some big people with a lot of money and a lot at stake have decided that Smalltalk is a viable solution for that environment. -- James O'Connor -------------------------------------- joconnor@jmpstart.com http://www.jmpstart.com --------------------------------------