Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!decwrl!nsc!voder!cullsj!david
From: david@cullsj.UUCP (David Taylor)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Subject: Re: Diff between st/V and st/V 286
Summary: Don't throw out your 'C' compiler just yet...
Keywords: smalltalk digitalk 286
Message-ID: <629@cullsj.UUCP>
Date: 1 Jul 89 01:58:02 GMT
References: <596@swbatl.UUCP> <2331@pur-phy> <4832@ficc.uu.net>
Organization: Cullinet Software, San Jose, CA
Lines: 45

In article <4832@ficc.uu.net>, cliff@ficc.uu.net (cliff click) writes:
> 
> Why???  Why NO OBJECT SWAPPING in Smalltalk/V 286???  I bought it for 
> my 1 Meg machine, only to discover that I couldn't run the bit editor
> or clone my system because 1 Meg was not enough!  
> 
> Actually I assumed Smalltalk/V did NOT object-swap since V 286 did not.
> Because of that lack I decided to do a product (I write games) in C
> instead; overlays are painful but I can run in 512K.
> 
> Now I have to go re-think my choices...  
> 
> Digitalk, are you listening???  Object-swapping gives Smalltalk/V 286
> the equivalent of Virtual Memory!  Applications of *any* size can run
> on a lowly PC (or even AT!).  This is a big deal; you should install
> it *right away* on the 286 version.

I have Smalltalk/V.
Originally, I ran it on a dual-floppy, 640K, 4MHz 8088.
That was fine for learning, when the Smalltalk objects really were small
(Smalltalk/V does no object-swapping on dual-floppy systems.
 It just suddenly aborts when space is exhausted).

As the objects grew, I migrated to a 640K 10MHz 8088 with a 65 ms. hard disk.
That's when I experienced object-swapping.
Please believe me when I say that it is painfully SSSSLLLLOOOOOWWW on such a
system. 
Unless your games never exhaust memory, or they do but are targeted 
towards the masochist market, I do not think you will be very successful using
Smalltalk/V on the above platforms (PLUG: My old systems are for sale -
see misc.forsale).
Now I run Smalltalk/V on a 1Meg, 16Mhz 80286 with a 28 ms hard disk.
Object-swapping is not as painful, but I must say I still dread the tones
heralding its start.

The Moral: Yes, object-swapping is better than no object-swapping in most cases.
	   But the cost is high. In my case, satisfying Smalltalk's voracious
	   resource appetite has been my ONLY reason for upgrading my hardware.
	   Without object-swapping, I would need lots of memory. With 
	   object-swapping, I need sufficient memory, a fast hard-disk, and 
	   lots and lots of patience.

david l. taylor

I don't think my employer has any opinions on Smalltalk/V.