Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!yeshua.marcam.com!charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu!nic-nac.CSU.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu!chpc.utexas.edu!news.utdallas.edu!feenix.metronet.com!mdefelic
From: mdefelic@metronet.com (Mitch DeFelice)
Subject: Re: Common misconceptions about Smalltalk
Message-ID: <CvJBL7.9ws@metronet.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 1994 03:41:30 GMT
References: <342siu$54j@ixnews1.ix.netcom.com>
Organization: Texas Metronet, Internet for the Individual  214-705-2901 (info)
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 24

Donna McClure (bhadra@ix.netcom.com)
: My question for this usenet is what do some of you think are the main 
: misconceptions about Smalltalk and what do believe to be the truth
: (can be a range dependent on : products) for each?

One misconception of smalltalk which continues to bite managers
is that Smalltalk is NOT a language but, an ENVIRONMENT.  It has
its own memory mangement, scheduler, compiler, etc, etc...

This can become an real issue under certain development environments
like coding for realtime embedded applications, or developing for
target environments which have limited "Virtual Memory."  (i.e.
limited disk space)

It is true, Smalltalk is a very productive tool. However, used
in the wrong environment, it is no more productive than a
traditional language.


Mitch De Felice
mdefelic@metronet.com



