Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!uknet!cix.compulink.co.uk!tlaw
From: tlaw@cix.compulink.co.uk ("Anthony D Law")
Subject: Re: Smalltalk, Taligent, Cairo, OpenStep, C++
Message-ID: <CwGv5L.6tI@cix.compulink.co.uk>
Organization: Parkside Information Management
References: <35k325$9fh@walters.East.Sun.COM>
Date: Wed, 21 Sep 1994 06:24:57 GMT
X-News-Software: Ameol
Lines: 20

Perhaps one of the key things about Smalltalk is that there are now 
emerging a range of development tools: e.g. VisualWorks based on 
ParcPlace st-80, Digitalk Parts (st-V), Envy (st-V), IBM VisualAge, Envy 
(st-V). st-80 went through a major glitch during 1992 when it integrated 
with the X-Windows environment on X platforms, but I expect this is now 
solved (I changed jobs and lost contact).

Incidentally I do not agree that it is "more difficult to write 
structured code in this environment than using a 'language' like C++". It 
is extremely easy to write unstructured code in procedural languages 
(aka: You can write Fortran programs in any language). It is almost 
impossible to be unstructured in Smalltalk. However, the structuring 
which is mandated by the O-O environment is not necessarily what 3GL 
writers are used to, though I would suggest that the concepts of 
modularisation and clear parameterisation are at the centre of both. As 
an aside, I came to Smalltalk with experience of Algol-68, where some 
object-based concepts are already explicit, so this helped.

TOny
(Tony Law, tlaw@cix.compulink.co.uk)
