[self-interest] Re: Re: An OO history

[Ian Trudel]

----- Original Message -----
From: "John Hinsley" <jhinsley at telinco.co.uk>
To: <self-interest at yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 3:01 PM
Subject: [self-interest] Re: Re: An OO history


> Steve Dekorte <steve at dekorte.com> wrote
>
> > In my experience, most developers find Smalltalk style code very
> > difficult to read.
>
> I think it depends on where they're coming from. I can imagine an
> experienced C or C++ programmer looking at Smalltalk code and finding it
> completely incomprehensible, just as an experienced Perl programmer
> would find Python a mystery.

It's not my feeling. Smalltalk is very readable and highly orthogonal
language, in spide of his dynamic aspect. One thing who would completely
clutter someone from another background is the environment, which is highly
interactive and window-based, with *no* edit-compile-run cycle. An important
fact about Smalltalk is the code document itself. This fact is not so true
with other programming languages.

Ian