Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!lerc.nasa.gov!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!math.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!rfenney.slip.netcom.com!user
From: rfenney@directnet.com (Robert J. Fenney)
Subject: Re: C++ vs Smalltalk?
Message-ID: <rfenney-121095233315@rfenney.slip.netcom.com>
Followup-To: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk
Sender: netnews@mork.netcom.com
Nntp-Posting-Host: rfenney.slip.netcom.com
Organization: FenTek
References: <45j18l$5as@bcrkh13.bnr.ca> <jazzbeauDGCnIH.FLw@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 06:43:18 GMT
Lines: 65
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:154111 comp.lang.smalltalk:29379

In article <jazzbeauDGCnIH.FLw@netcom.com>, jazzbeau@netcom.com (Steve
Barnette) wrote:

> Try posting in comp.lang.object or comp.lang.smalltalk. Jeff Sutherland? 
> hangs around there and has lots of information like this.
> 
> Keep in mind he is bias towards Smalltalk and Smalltalkers will pounce at 
> even the mention of C++. 
> 
> From my experience Smalltalk is an excellent language for teaching OOP, 
> but I would not use it for real world work. It's memory requiresment for 
> both Development and Runtime are VERY high. Performance is so-so. Because 
> of weak-typing your end-user ends up doing your QA. If you go with 
> Smalltalk it is a must to use Envy or simular product. This is because 
> the main idea behind ST is building a toolbox of class', methods, and 
> modifications to the ST image. Then a new version of your ST comes out 
> and how do you get all these changes to your new version. Without Envy or 
> simular tool its a nightmare. 
> 
> Last is cost. ST products are very expensive plan around $8000-$10000 per 
> seat for a full developer setup. Then support contracts and lots of ST 
> consultants. 
> 
> I think you will find C++ a far less expensive. far better performing to 
> work in. 
> 
> So check the comp.lang.smalltalk area, but duck when you mention C++.
> 
> Steve B.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> 
> FCS Systems Inc.                                             
> jazzbeau@netcom.com
> jazzbeau@msn.com
> 
>                Mo' Hackin', Less Slackin'
> 
>              

I realy have to disagree. When is comes to complexity C++ takes the cake.
You are right that the average smalltalk tool set costs more than a
straight c++ compiler and IDE. There are two points that you are missing:
if I pay even 10k per seat for a tool that saves me 80-120 man hours I have
just paid for the tool (Smalltalk tools are around 4-5k for the team
versions anyway.) The complexity of C++ for a programmer that does not have
a firm understanding of OOPS and a long learning curve means that it can
not be used on most corporate development projects. I know all of this
because I have spent the last 9 years doing the C++ parts of projects like
this and teaching the corporate staff to support the system whan the
development is complete. I am almost to the point of thinking that
corporate development staff by and large will never be able to use C++ for
systems development. Smalltalk is a better fit for these developers. 

Before anyone flames me stop and think. Most MIS department will send their
developers to a 2-5 day class for C++ and then they are expected to be 100%
productive and meet very agressive dead lines. It is not the developers
faults they have to work in a very grueling point in history. What was that
chinese curse? "May you live in exciting times?"


Robert
