Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!portc02.blue.aol.com!portc01.blue.aol.com!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.mathworks.com!uunet!in3.uu.net!news2.new-york.net!not-for-mail
From: vlad@world2u.com (Vlastimil Adamovsky)
Subject: Re: Another Way Of Looking At Smalltalk (2)
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
X-Nntp-Posting-User: (Unauthenticated)
Message-ID: <E0BvwM.Gor@news2.new-york.net>
References: <E065sA.IFz@news2.new-york.net> <55is7b$998@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
X-Trace: 847081027/21615
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: i123.146.world2u.com
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 04:18:15 GMT
Lines: 55

dogmat@aol.com (Dogmat) wrote:

> Vlastimil Adamovsky wrote:

>>Why is it so bad idea to have a specialized chip for >Smalltalk? There
>will be a
>>chip for Java, so why not for Smalltalk?

>Not a bad idea, just not something I want my mission-critical software
>developer to be working on. History is littered with businesses that
>expanded beyond their own level of knowledge and crash-burned. Why would a
>software developer know how to build a great chip?

Maybe I am missing a point. I don't think software developer should even come
close to that chip. Since we all here use Object Oriented Programming, we are
not so much concerned about how our stuff is implemented. Object-oriented
developer's task is to create the "correct" relations between objects and make
them work. So if chip will make the stuff work faster and more reliable, I'll 
take it. Since we do our design "right", it will not impact the way how software

will work, even using that chip.  It will be only implementation that will get
changed, not interfaces. 


> Why would a software
>company switch to hardware?

Because all software we write, runs on hardware. I cannot imagine to be able to
survive as software developer without any hardware. 

> I'm just saying that PPD would die if they
>attempted to build a chip.

Why would PPD build it?  They would certainly die...  It is better to make an
order and let a knowledgable company in that field to build it. I never built
any computer, but I can use it and still looking for some new hardware, which
can improve Object-Oriented Systems performance.

> This would hurt all of us.

Smalltalk is not proprietary language.










 Vlastimil Adamovsky
 ** C++ and Smalltalk consultant **
 * http://www.stepweb.com *

