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: 10a146,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: fa0ae,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gidfa0ae,public From: jur@topdog.cs.umbc.edu (Jacqueline U. Robertson) Subject: Re: Which language pays most? Smalltalk, not C++ nor Java. Date: 1998/01/03 Message-ID: <68lm53$7nj@topdog.cs.umbc.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 312427970 References: <199712121931.LAA25389@sirius.infonex.com> <68du36$l10$1@darla.visi.com> <01bd171b$444880c0$8a0af880@fido312.UIC.EDU> <34AD2228.ADFB60DB@its.cl> Organization: University Of Maryland Baltimore County Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.ada,comp.edu Date: 1998-01-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: By my reading, the point that 'language doesn't matter' assumes equivalent skills in all languages studied and equivalent tool availability. A couple of months ago there was an excelent article in VA Report that explained why A Smalltalk developer was pretty much permanently going to remain more productive than a Java developer (it has to do with all the extra 'stuff' one has to remember while doing Java development, and the fact that people can recall at best 5-9 things in short term memory at once). Secondly, I've watched for years while the various analyst groups (Gartner, Meta, et. al.) have claimed that C++ tools would catch up to Smalltalk tool 'within 2 years'. Hasn't happened yet, and I doubt it will. Given that, the prerequisites for the assumption don't hold, and won't hold anytime soon.... James A. Robertson email: jamesr@parcplace.com phone: 410 952-0471 In article <34AD2228.ADFB60DB@its.cl>, Guillermo Schwarz wrote: >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. >--------------DC0FD5ABE0708554F0A660BA >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > >Shelly Mujtaba wrote: > >> the truth of this whole matter is none...what will eventually pay off is >> your application modeling skills. If you can take a problem and model an >> elegant solution for it ...any language will do. I have created >> applications in Java and then recreated them in smalltalk and c++ and what >> really helped was not my knowledge of the language but understanding the >> model. but then if we are discussing career as a "coder" ...well... > >Your idea is a nice one. It sounds great at least. "It is not the languagethat >matters but the design". It is hard to prove anything beyond that, >bacause you can always say the desing was the problem and not the >language. >OTOH, there are some designs that can be implemented in Java and C++. >Take for example the following design: >"I need a way to express lambda expressions so that I can make a graphic >with it, for example: y = x^2, and having those as variables in a program". > >A Smalltalker would just use the compiler to evaluate the lambda expressions, >while the C++ programmer would have a 6 months job trying to achieve >the same. > >Maybe you can say this example was not fare, because it turned out that most >of the implementation is already written in Smalltalk. Ok. I agree with you, >it was already coded in Smalltalk, so only an interface was needed. > >Let us take another more real example: >"I want an object transport to transport objects in a network between >applications. Objects can be moved or copied depending on the object >itself, on the sender and on the receiver, and objects can be persistent or >transient". > >A Smalltalker would think using TCP/IP (or another network protocol), >serializing the objects, and making the 2 protocols (move and copy) will >mean 2 days of work (if lazy) because everything is already done. Probably >what will really take time will be to make the design to make extensible >applications on the net, calculate how to redistribute objects in the final >app. etc. > >But in C++ even serializing objects will mean a lot of work. Forget about >study how to redistribute objects. > >Conclusion: >Which app. would need to be coded in C++ if Smalltalk already exists? >Why should someone bother with edit, compile, link, run, debug if it can be >done all on the fly? >Why would someone mess with a wanna be OOL if a OOL from the ground >up is available? >-- >I use CAPS to emphasize, not to yell. >I take unpopular positions. >This signature is copyrighted and used without permission. > > >--------------DC0FD5ABE0708554F0A660BA >Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-Description: Card for Guillermo Schwarz >Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" > >begin: vcard >fn: Guillermo Schwarz >n: Schwarz;Guillermo >org: ITS >email;internet: gschwarz@its.cl >title: Software Engineer >note: Remove stop.spam to reply by mail. >x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 >x-mozilla-html: TRUE >version: 2.1 >end: vcard > > >--------------DC0FD5ABE0708554F0A660BA-- >