Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!sri-unix!DDYER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
From: DDYER@USC-ISIB.ARPA
Newsgroups: net.works
Subject: smalltalk
Message-ID: <13028@sri-arpa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-Aug-84 03:49:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.13028
Posted: Fri Aug 31 03:49:00 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Sep-84 20:05:28 EDT
Lines: 33

From:  Dave Dyer       <DDYER@USC-ISIB.ARPA>


	       I've been hearing the word "Smalltalk" crop up in a lot of
	conversations lately - mostly in reference to what was done right
	with the Macintosh, or in Sci. Am. articles and in a few network
	articles.

Smalltalk is a great idea whose ship hasn't quite come in yet.

As far as I know, the only commercially available "real" smalltalk
is on a Dolphin, from Xerox.  But rumor has it that you have to take
lots of qualudes to slow yourself down enough to like it.  Much
better is running it on a Dorado (also from Xerox).

The real essence of smalltalk is its "object oriented" programming
style.  I think quite a few commercial systems have adopted the
essential elements of the style  (active agents, message passing, etc.),
without buying the whole hog.  How much of this shows through
to the users varies.

The places where you can buy commercial systems and program
in the style are pretty limited -- as far as I know only on
lisp machines.   The key words here are "LOOPS" on Xerox-type
lisp machines running Interlisp-D, and "FLAVORS" on Mit-type 
lisp machines from Symbolics and LMI.

I do essentially all of my programming with FLAVORS.




-------