Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!uunet!hsi!stpstn!cox
From: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next
Subject: Re: When is Smalltalk coming to the NeXT?
Message-ID: <4470@stpstn.UUCP>
Date: 9 Apr 90 17:09:57 GMT
References: <6461@blake.acs.washington.edu> <34620@brunix.UUCP> <10639@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Reply-To: cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox)
Distribution: comp.sys.next
Organization: Stepstone
Lines: 23

In article <10639@portia.Stanford.EDU> grd@portia.Stanford.EDU (Glendon Diener) writes:
>What can Smalltalk do that Objective-C can't? Incrementally compile.
>IMHO, fast, incremental compilation is a *must* for exploratory
>programming, and exploratory programming is a *must* for navigating
>through extensive class libraries like the appkit. Let me explain.
>
Objective-C was never designed as a panacea, but as a tool. It was never
intended to 'compete' with Smalltalk (IMHO, tools *never* compete, they
just sit around peaceably coexisting, awaiting their intended job. Tool
proponents, however, behave differently).

Kurt Schmucker and I coauthored a paper for OOPSLA a few years ago
titled 'Producer: Translating Prototypes to Production' or something
similar, that describes a semiautomatic translation program that
converts Smalltalk applications to Objective-C. The idea is to use
Smalltalk for prototyping and then automatically convert the code
to Objective-C for production.

The translation tool, Producer, was released to the public domain via
net.sources.misc, and presumably still lives on an archive somewhere.
Note that the program is *not* supported, and in my opinion, needs and
*DESERVES* further attention to extend it from the proof of feasibility
stage where I left it and make it a robust production programming tool.