Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!lll-winken.llnl.gov!ames!ictv!tmh
From: tmh@ictv.com (Todd Hoff)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk has yet another 7-1 productivity advantage story ...
Message-ID: <1995Jan28.232519.4044@ictv.com>
Organization: /import/news/lib/organi[sz]ation
References: <3ge7r6$nti@news1.delphi.com> <3gegq2$sg4@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>
Date: Sat, 28 Jan 1995 23:25:19 GMT
Lines: 14

In article <3gegq2$sg4@falcon.ccs.uwo.ca>,  <wheagy@uwo.ca> wrote:
>This same sort of improvement comes with using APL over Fortran or C.  I 
>feel it comes at least partly from the interactive nature of the 
>interpreter, allowing verification of each (small) step as you go, and 
>encouraging experimentation with various solutions.  Of course, the 
>design intentions get tested immediately also, and changes in 
>specification come much more quickly as the design gets tested.
>

This would be my guess. 5 of the 7 points increase because of the
interpreter, 1 point because of the class library, maybe fractional
points for the lack of typedness although type safety isn't usually 
a slowdown for experienced C++ programmers, and the rest in memory 
management.
