Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ritcv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!ritcv!jeh
From: jeh@ritcv.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.st80
Subject: ST80 to Micros? ... another aspect: Can ST be Smaller?
Message-ID: <1125@ritcv.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 19-Jul-84 20:29:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: ritcv.1125
Posted: Thu Jul 19 20:29:31 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Jul-84 02:59:53 EDT
References: <1237@ihuxl.UUCP>
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Lines: 22

Yes, Smalltalk has a very large virtual machine, and it's tightly bound in to
an environment which contains, most importantly, a hi-res bitmapped display,
and also a pointing device.

I'd like to hear people's opinions on this alternative -- taking all
the graphics/window stuff away.  What do you have left? A lisp-like system
where you enter a piece of code, possibly compile it, and store it away
in your workspace for anyone to use.  Since ST is so big in terms of the
software that is built in, it seems you lose a lot by not having the ability
to "browse", and to view several components of your system at once.

...Which for me brings up a more basic question.  What is Smalltalk good
for? I'd be very surprised if someone someday "OEM'd" a product with all
the soft/firm ware written in Smalltalk. The only things I can think of
is (a) education and (b) an environment in which you can work out some
rough designs without worrying yet about the details of the final
implementation.

				Jim Heliotis
				{allegra,seismo}!rochester!ritcv!jeh
				rocksvax!ritcv!jeh
				ritcv!jeh@Rochester