The Smalltalk Revitalization Program

I see a lot of value in what you are doing Richard!

Here are some of my personal efforts on that line:

Startups and Smalltak - Presented at Smalltalks2014 Córdoba, Argentina

<a href="http://www.slideshare.net/sebastianconcept/startups-and-smalltak-presented-at-smalltalks2014-crdoba-argentina" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fsebastianconcept%2Fstartups-and-smalltak-presented-at-smalltalks2014-crdoba-argentina\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNFAk5paO1W1ZWjun-Kiw12hF8BTOg';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fsebastianconcept%2Fstartups-and-smalltak-presented-at-smalltalks2014-crdoba-argentina\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNFAk5paO1W1ZWjun-Kiw12hF8BTOg';return true;">http://www.slideshare.net/sebastianconcept/startups-and-smalltak-presented-at-smalltalks2014-crdoba-argentina

Flow: A living full-stack framework for the web

<a href="http://www.slideshare.net/sebastianconcept/flow-39897704" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fsebastianconcept%2Fflow-39897704\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNFbTOzAX3QT8HlF9YODOlMbzVmEtw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slideshare.net%2Fsebastianconcept%2Fflow-39897704\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNFbTOzAX3QT8HlF9YODOlMbzVmEtw';return true;">http://www.slideshare.net/sebastianconcept/flow-39897704

I think I could help you with some posts covering different topics

BTW I totally agree on productivity the only remark that I do have there to share (maybe in one of those posts that could have a reflective tone) is that (a) world is catching up and (b) the UX of our tool still suck. And we can do absolutely nothing about a.

On Dec 22, 2014, at 10:45 PM, Richard Eng <<a href="javascript:" target="_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto="VbW8OA5sSLEJ" onmousedown="this.href='javascript:';return true;" onclick="this.href='javascript:';return true;">horrido...@...> wrote:

I had a lofty idea, but then I came to my senses. My idea was too lofty...

<a href="http://smalltalkrenaissance.wordpress.com/" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalkrenaissance.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF89gsfVnhpPf6F_H-_dtb9iYgULQ';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalkrenaissance.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF89gsfVnhpPf6F_H-_dtb9iYgULQ';return true;">http://smalltalkrenaissance.wordpress.com/

It would be presumptuous of me to try and sign up supporters for the program. I mean, who the hell am I?!

At any rate, such a campaign is a lot of work, maybe too much. And the odds are really against it.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "amber-lang" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="javascript:" target="_blank" gdf-obfuscated-mailto="VbW8OA5sSLEJ" onmousedown="this.href='javascript:';return true;" onclick="this.href='javascript:';return true;">amber-lang+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/optout" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://groups.google.com/d/optout';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://groups.google.com/d/optout';return true;">https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Hello Richard,

Most Smalltalkers would love to have their paying projects be based on Smalltalk. We all have very similar motivations for this.  I understand and I'm with you on wanting Smalltalk to be accepted as a more mainstream technology choice.

I've been using Smalltalk or have managed Smalltalk based projects since the early 1990's.  I can tell you, I've lost too many projects by trying to sell Smalltalk.  Most of my prospective customers do not understand and do not share the passion.  They feel most comfortable with buzzword compliant technologies such as ".NET", "Java", "SQL".  And now, you can add "Javascript" to the list for some projects.  

To close sales, I just presented the benefits of our existing software apps, frameworks and methodologies.  Richard, stick to the benefits on your website.  Smalltalk has many strong points.  If my customer wants to know the details, I frame it by saying, "when I pick up the telephone, I want a dial-tone, and don't care if the backend at the telco is running Linux, Windows or Commodore 64."  Focus on the positive benefits the user experiences, the "dial-tone" for example. Then you can find case studies of successful, large deployments of Smalltalk.  I used (and still do) IBM VisualAge software development tools. IBM Smalltalk has been deployed in mission critical roles at banks, telcos, and Wall Street, for good reasons.  IBM has some credibility. Although, the most impressive case studies are now dated.  Today, Amber is a great tool "for Javascript centric projects."  If you can, Smalltalk has to be introduced as the excellent technology responsible for outstanding deliverables and on-time, on-budget projects. You have to be open and honest, but you also need to provide the best business case to your clients.  It's an art form. 

Please perceive the following as constructive. Your web site positions Smalltalk negativley: 

HOME OF THE SMALLTALK REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

As a businessman or project lead, I don't want to put the success of my project on a technology that needs "revitalization".  

Amber is leading edge technology. Amber has a set of real benefits. Javascript provides the runtime VM and is ubiquitous.  There are lots of great stats to support the growth of Javascript.  Amber makes Javascript shine. Meteor is riding Javascript's coattails, presenting benefits to optimize Javascript centric projects.  Javascript is not a productive language (see table below) and needs Amber's help. 

Occasionally, I write a reply to blog posts, trying to express my passion about the benefits of Smalltalk. Such posts fall on deaf ears. My conclusion, unless you've used Smalltalk or viewed a competent  Smalltalker in action, there will be no interest.  Here's a post, pasted below, expressing my attempt to reply to a "Static Typing is Supperior..." blog post.  I could have written it better. I didn't bother to tune-it.  In hind-sight, I would not make any negative statements and would rewrite any parts that could be mistaken for elitist. I'm learning, it's always best to remove "ego" from human interactions. 

--- start pasted post ---

This post attempts to shed light on Static Typing versus Dynamic Typing, using Smalltalk and C#.

Flexibility is beneficial and crucial to problem solving. When we lack flexibility, we paint ourselves into a corner.  Programming languages are tools. We need to select the right tool for the job.  Else, this quote describes our limitations:

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

Static vs Dynamic Typing has become a religious argument. Lets not drink the purple Cool-Aid. (a reference to cult followers consuming cyanide-laced Cool-Aid <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones )

I've used both statically typed, C# most recently. And, Smalltalk on the dynamic front.  In my experience, using C#, after Smalltalk is like going back to using a typewriter with white-out, after using a word processor.  Smalltalk is the dynamic word processor. I am 3x more productive with Smalltalk.  I reach a state of mastery faster and more often when using Smalltalk.

For supportive reading, here's a well written article on the topic: <a href="http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;">http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html

Visual Studio vs Smalltalk IDE example

In my Smalltalk IDE, I can select any method, right-click and instantly open a list of all implementors and/or all callers of that method. It's just part of the meta-data.  I want re-usable code, so polymorphic method names are a good thing. A simple example, send the "print" message to any object, letting the object definition encapsulate how to print any object type, or defer to the super-class' generic implementation.

For decades, in Smalltalk, most code could be edited in the debugger, saved (incrementally compiled) and optionally continue running your program. Visual Studio has a partial implementation for .NET languages, not even close to Smalltalk's ability to edit in debuggers, inspectors and other dynamic tools. 

I don't want to sound religious about Smalltalk, but I do prefer a word processor to a typewriter. That's my reality.  Still, I do need to focus on the-best-tool-for-the-job. C# has a place in my toolbox.

Dynamically Typed Smalltalk Shown to be Most Productive

There are many ways to measure productivity and code quality.  Ultimately, total effort per function point is a useful one. On page 46 of <a href="http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;">http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf a table sets out number of months to implement a 1,000 function point program.  Here's a few metrics for dynamics and static languagues:

Smalltalk   21 coding months

Ruby        46

C#          51

Python      53

C++         53

Java        53

PHP         53

JavaScript  71

C          128

Assembly   213

Smalltalk AND .NET

In my work, I've decided to use both highly productive Smalltalk and .NET with C# for Windows and server apps. 

Here's a Smalltalk for .NET, a work-in-progress (just the language, no classic Smalltalk IDE or debuggers yet). Code can be developed in Pharo or VisualWorks Smalltalk, then migrated to Essence#

<a href="https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;">https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/

Smalltalk AND Javascript

For client-side web apps, Smalltalk and JavaScript. Here's a tool that compiles Smalltalk to JavaScript:

<a href="http://amber-lang.net/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;">http://amber-lang.net/

I can manipulate JavaScript objects with Smalltalk, vice-versa.  Amber's web browser hosted dynamic tutorial is being upgraded to the most recent version of Amber. Check back later for the interactive tutorial that teases, "Got 5 minutes? ...  

Learning Overhead

Smalltalk has 5 keywords.  C++ has more than 50 keywords.  Learning Smalltalk is quick, easy and will teach you design patterns to make you better with other languages. Take a look: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4

Hello Richard,

Most Smalltalkers would love to have their paying projects be based on Smalltalk. We all have very similar motivations for this.  I understand and I'm with you on wanting Smalltalk to be accepted as a more mainstream technology choice.

I've been using Smalltalk or have managed Smalltalk based projects since the early 1990's.  I can tell you, I've lost too many projects by trying to sell Smalltalk.  Most of my prospective customers do not understand and do not share the passion.  They feel most comfortable with buzzword compliant technologies such as ".NET", "Java", "SQL".  And now, you can add "Javascript" to the list for some projects.  

To close sales, I just presented the benefits of our existing software apps, frameworks and methodologies.  Richard, stick to the benefits on your website.  Smalltalk has many strong points.  If my customer wants to know the details, I frame it by saying, "when I pick up the telephone, I want a dial-tone, and don't care if the backend at the telco is running Linux, Windows or Commodore 64."  Focus on the positive benefits the user experiences, the "dial-tone" for example. Then you can find case studies of successful, large deployments of Smalltalk.  I used (and still do) IBM VisualAge software development tools. IBM Smalltalk has been deployed in mission critical roles at banks, telcos, and Wall Street, for good reasons.  IBM has some credibility. Although, the most impressive case studies are now dated.  Today, Amber is a great tool "for Javascript centric projects."  If you can, Smalltalk has to be introduced as the excellent technology responsible for outstanding deliverables and on-time, on-budget projects. You have to be open and honest, but you also need to provide the best business case to your clients.  It's an art form. 

Please perceive the following as constructive. Your web site positions Smalltalk negativley: 

HOME OF THE SMALLTALK REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

As a businessman or project lead, I don't want to put the success of my project on a technology that needs "revitalization".  

Amber is leading edge technology. Amber has a set of real benefits. Javascript provides the runtime VM and is ubiquitous.  There are lots of great stats to support the growth of Javascript.  Amber makes Javascript shine. Meteor is riding Javascript's coattails, presenting benefits to optimize Javascript centric projects.  Javascript is not a productive language (see table below) and needs Amber's help. 

Occasionally, I write a reply to blog posts, trying to express my passion about the benefits of Smalltalk. Such posts fall on deaf ears. My conclusion, unless you've used Smalltalk or viewed a competent  Smalltalker in action, there will be no interest.  Here's a post, pasted below, expressing my attempt to reply to a "Static Typing is Supperior..." blog post.  I could have written it better. I didn't bother to tune-it.  In hind-sight, I would not make any negative statements and would rewrite any parts that could be mistaken for elitist. I'm learning, it's always best to remove "ego" from human interactions. 

--- start pasted post ---

This post attempts to shed light on Static Typing versus Dynamic Typing, using Smalltalk and C#.

Flexibility is beneficial and crucial to problem solving. When we lack flexibility, we paint ourselves into a corner.  Programming languages are tools. We need to select the right tool for the job.  Else, this quote describes our limitations:

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

Static vs Dynamic Typing has become a religious argument. Lets not drink the purple Cool-Aid. (a reference to cult followers consuming cyanide-laced Cool-Aid <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones )

I've used both statically typed, C# most recently. And, Smalltalk on the dynamic front.  In my experience, using C#, after Smalltalk is like going back to using a typewriter with white-out, after using a word processor.  Smalltalk is the dynamic word processor. I am 3x more productive with Smalltalk.  I reach a state of mastery faster and more often when using Smalltalk.

For supportive reading, here's a well written article on the topic: <a href="http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;">http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html

Visual Studio vs Smalltalk IDE example

In my Smalltalk IDE, I can select any method, right-click and instantly open a list of all implementors and/or all callers of that method. It's just part of the meta-data.  I want re-usable code, so polymorphic method names are a good thing. A simple example, send the "print" message to any object, letting the object definition encapsulate how to print any object type, or defer to the super-class' generic implementation.

For decades, in Smalltalk, most code could be edited in the debugger, saved (incrementally compiled) and optionally continue running your program. Visual Studio has a partial implementation for .NET languages, not even close to Smalltalk's ability to edit in debuggers, inspectors and other dynamic tools. 

I don't want to sound religious about Smalltalk, but I do prefer a word processor to a typewriter. That's my reality.  Still, I do need to focus on the-best-tool-for-the-job. C# has a place in my toolbox.

Dynamically Typed Smalltalk Shown to be Most Productive

There are many ways to measure productivity and code quality.  Ultimately, total effort per function point is a useful one. On page 46 of <a href="http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;">http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf a table sets out number of months to implement a 1,000 function point program.  Here's a few metrics for dynamics and static languagues:

Smalltalk   21 coding months

Ruby        46

C#          51

Python      53

C++         53

Java        53

PHP         53

JavaScript  71

C          128

Assembly   213

Smalltalk AND .NET

In my work, I've decided to use both highly productive Smalltalk and .NET with C# for Windows and server apps. 

Here's a Smalltalk for .NET, a work-in-progress (just the language, no classic Smalltalk IDE or debuggers yet). Code can be developed in Pharo or VisualWorks Smalltalk, then migrated to Essence#

<a href="https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;">https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/

Smalltalk AND Javascript

For client-side web apps, Smalltalk and JavaScript. Here's a tool that compiles Smalltalk to JavaScript:

<a href="http://amber-lang.net/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;">http://amber-lang.net/

I can manipulate JavaScript objects with Smalltalk, vice-versa.  Amber's web browser hosted dynamic tutorial is being upgraded to the most recent version of Amber. Check back later for the interactive tutorial that teases, "Got 5 minutes? ...  

Learning Overhead

Smalltalk has 5 keywords.  C++ has more than 50 keywords.  Learning Smalltalk is quick, easy and will teach you design patterns to make you better with other languages. Take a look: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4

I'm not sure my website positions Smalltalk negatively. "Revitalization" is a reflection on one single reality:  Smalltalk is a largely forgotten language...

Despite all the good work that has been done by the Smalltalk community, Smalltalk still languishes in relative obscurity. At the TIOBE index, Smalltalk doesn't even register on the top 100 list (it used to be on the top 50 list, but has since disappeared). At <a href="http://langpop.corger.nl" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Flangpop.corger.nl\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHup6iY7zHRilsmGPdClRNVTCUuLg';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Flangpop.corger.nl\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHup6iY7zHRilsmGPdClRNVTCUuLg';return true;">langpop.corger.nl, the language is in 65th position!

As you've indicated, companies don't think about Smalltalk at all. They're predisposed to well-established technologies such as .NET and Java. Trying to change their mindset, trying to educate them, first requires gaining their attention. In other words, it requires PR and marketing.

As Smalltalkers, we mustn't bury our heads in the sand. Smalltalk needs revitalization; it needs public support. That's what Smalltalk Renaissance is all about.

On Wednesday, 24 December 2014 07:05:32 UTC-5, Peter wrote:

Hello Richard,

Most Smalltalkers would love to have their paying projects be based on Smalltalk. We all have very similar motivations for this.  I understand and I'm with you on wanting Smalltalk to be accepted as a more mainstream technology choice.

I've been using Smalltalk or have managed Smalltalk based projects since the early 1990's.  I can tell you, I've lost too many projects by trying to sell Smalltalk.  Most of my prospective customers do not understand and do not share the passion.  They feel most comfortable with buzzword compliant technologies such as ".NET", "Java", "SQL".  And now, you can add "Javascript" to the list for some projects.  

To close sales, I just presented the benefits of our existing software apps, frameworks and methodologies.  Richard, stick to the benefits on your website.  Smalltalk has many strong points.  If my customer wants to know the details, I frame it by saying, "when I pick up the telephone, I want a dial-tone, and don't care if the backend at the telco is running Linux, Windows or Commodore 64."  Focus on the positive benefits the user experiences, the "dial-tone" for example. Then you can find case studies of successful, large deployments of Smalltalk.  I used (and still do) IBM VisualAge software development tools. IBM Smalltalk has been deployed in mission critical roles at banks, telcos, and Wall Street, for good reasons.  IBM has some credibility. Although, the most impressive case studies are now dated.  Today, Amber is a great tool "for Javascript centric projects."  If you can, Smalltalk has to be introduced as the excellent technology responsible for outstanding deliverables and on-time, on-budget projects. You have to be open and honest, but you also need to provide the best business case to your clients.  It's an art form. 

Please perceive the following as constructive. Your web site positions Smalltalk negativley: 

HOME OF THE SMALLTALK REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

As a businessman or project lead, I don't want to put the success of my project on a technology that needs "revitalization".  

Amber is leading edge technology. Amber has a set of real benefits. Javascript provides the runtime VM and is ubiquitous.  There are lots of great stats to support the growth of Javascript.  Amber makes Javascript shine. Meteor is riding Javascript's coattails, presenting benefits to optimize Javascript centric projects.  Javascript is not a productive language (see table below) and needs Amber's help. 

Occasionally, I write a reply to blog posts, trying to express my passion about the benefits of Smalltalk. Such posts fall on deaf ears. My conclusion, unless you've used Smalltalk or viewed a competent  Smalltalker in action, there will be no interest.  Here's a post, pasted below, expressing my attempt to reply to a "Static Typing is Supperior..." blog post.  I could have written it better. I didn't bother to tune-it.  In hind-sight, I would not make any negative statements and would rewrite any parts that could be mistaken for elitist. I'm learning, it's always best to remove "ego" from human interactions. 

--- start pasted post ---

This post attempts to shed light on Static Typing versus Dynamic Typing, using Smalltalk and C#.

Flexibility is beneficial and crucial to problem solving. When we lack flexibility, we paint ourselves into a corner.  Programming languages are tools. We need to select the right tool for the job.  Else, this quote describes our limitations:

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

Static vs Dynamic Typing has become a religious argument. Lets not drink the purple Cool-Aid. (a reference to cult followers consuming cyanide-laced Cool-Aid <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones )

I've used both statically typed, C# most recently. And, Smalltalk on the dynamic front.  In my experience, using C#, after Smalltalk is like going back to using a typewriter with white-out, after using a word processor.  Smalltalk is the dynamic word processor. I am 3x more productive with Smalltalk.  I reach a state of mastery faster and more often when using Smalltalk.

For supportive reading, here's a well written article on the topic: <a href="http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;">http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html

Visual Studio vs Smalltalk IDE example

In my Smalltalk IDE, I can select any method, right-click and instantly open a list of all implementors and/or all callers of that method. It's just part of the meta-data.  I want re-usable code, so polymorphic method names are a good thing. A simple example, send the "print" message to any object, letting the object definition encapsulate how to print any object type, or defer to the super-class' generic implementation.

For decades, in Smalltalk, most code could be edited in the debugger, saved (incrementally compiled) and optionally continue running your program. Visual Studio has a partial implementation for .NET languages, not even close to Smalltalk's ability to edit in debuggers, inspectors and other dynamic tools. 

I don't want to sound religious about Smalltalk, but I do prefer a word processor to a typewriter. That's my reality.  Still, I do need to focus on the-best-tool-for-the-job. C# has a place in my toolbox.

Dynamically Typed Smalltalk Shown to be Most Productive

There are many ways to measure productivity and code quality.  Ultimately, total effort per function point is a useful one. On page 46 of <a href="http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;">http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf a table sets out number of months to implement a 1,000 function point program.  Here's a few metrics for dynamics and static languagues:

Smalltalk   21 coding months

Ruby        46

C#          51

Python      53

C++         53

Java        53

PHP         53

JavaScript  71

C          128

Assembly   213

Smalltalk AND .NET

In my work, I've decided to use both highly productive Smalltalk and .NET with C# for Windows and server apps. 

Here's a Smalltalk for .NET, a work-in-progress (just the language, no classic Smalltalk IDE or debuggers yet). Code can be developed in Pharo or VisualWorks Smalltalk, then migrated to Essence#

<a href="https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;">https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/

Smalltalk AND Javascript

For client-side web apps, Smalltalk and JavaScript. Here's a tool that compiles Smalltalk to JavaScript:

<a href="http://amber-lang.net/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;">http://amber-lang.net/

I can manipulate JavaScript objects with Smalltalk, vice-versa.  Amber's web browser hosted dynamic tutorial is being upgraded to the most recent version of Amber. Check back later for the interactive tutorial that teases, "Got 5 minutes? ...  

Learning Overhead

Smalltalk has 5 keywords.  C++ has more than 50 keywords.  Learning Smalltalk is quick, easy and will teach you design patterns to make you better with other languages. Take a look: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4

The originator of Essence# started his blog with posts presenting only benefits and elegant descriptions about an object oriented technology. The website's header positions the technology as:

"Advanced Alien Technology"

He purposely did not want to make Essence# just another Smalltalk. I believe his strategy to be sound.  Maybe I'm too much of a sci-fi or Star Trek fan.  Discovering an advanced alien technology is exciting. Maybe a world-changer.

A major downside of all Smalltalk dialects is the lack of proper support for multi-threading and multiple CPUs.  To me, this is the single biggest drawback to Smalltalk.  My eCommerce websites, based on a Smalltalk engine, can not scale to support a large and successful (high traffic) enterprise.

Essence#, running atop the .NET virtual machine is the first Smalltalk that enables use of today's multi CPU hardware. This is a big, big deal!

For a big project, a website that must scale, I can now use Smalltalk.  I won't have to answer to any investors, clients, analysts for choosing a limited technology bound to only one CPU Core.

And, Amber on the client-side atop the ubiquitous Javascript VM.  We will get there with Smalltalk.

The only other Smalltalk with multi-thread / CPU capabilities is Gemstone, but it requires huge resources and expensive license fees for larger work-loads.

The best way to put Smalltak in the mainstream is to have a global success story built on Smalltalk.  What if Facebook or Twitter was built on Smalltalk?  With Essence#, this is now a possibility. The reach of all media channels would deliver the message of Smalltalk.  Personally, I'd love for the Smalltalk community to rally behind Essence#.  Currently  it is viable as a runtime for Smalltalk apps.  Development to be best done in Pharo or another Smalltalk with mature IDE.

On Wednesday, 24 December 2014 06:17:41 UTC-8, Richard Eng wrote:

A few days ago, I was looking at the Essence# website. I was confused for the longest time. I kept looking for some indication, some mention, that Essence# was derived from Smalltalk. I was looking for some explanation about the "superset" part of Smalltalk. In other words, I wanted to know what the language looked like, what its syntax was, but I couldn't (easily) find it!

It's a horribly designed website. I found it frustrating to use.

Ultimately, I concluded that Essence# was too new and not ready for prime time.

On Wednesday, 24 December 2014 07:05:32 UTC-5, Peter wrote:

Hello Richard,

Most Smalltalkers would love to have their paying projects be based on Smalltalk. We all have very similar motivations for this.  I understand and I'm with you on wanting Smalltalk to be accepted as a more mainstream technology choice.

I've been using Smalltalk or have managed Smalltalk based projects since the early 1990's.  I can tell you, I've lost too many projects by trying to sell Smalltalk.  Most of my prospective customers do not understand and do not share the passion.  They feel most comfortable with buzzword compliant technologies such as ".NET", "Java", "SQL".  And now, you can add "Javascript" to the list for some projects.  

To close sales, I just presented the benefits of our existing software apps, frameworks and methodologies.  Richard, stick to the benefits on your website.  Smalltalk has many strong points.  If my customer wants to know the details, I frame it by saying, "when I pick up the telephone, I want a dial-tone, and don't care if the backend at the telco is running Linux, Windows or Commodore 64."  Focus on the positive benefits the user experiences, the "dial-tone" for example. Then you can find case studies of successful, large deployments of Smalltalk.  I used (and still do) IBM VisualAge software development tools. IBM Smalltalk has been deployed in mission critical roles at banks, telcos, and Wall Street, for good reasons.  IBM has some credibility. Although, the most impressive case studies are now dated.  Today, Amber is a great tool "for Javascript centric projects."  If you can, Smalltalk has to be introduced as the excellent technology responsible for outstanding deliverables and on-time, on-budget projects. You have to be open and honest, but you also need to provide the best business case to your clients.  It's an art form. 

Please perceive the following as constructive. Your web site positions Smalltalk negativley: 

HOME OF THE SMALLTALK REVITALIZATION PROGRAM

As a businessman or project lead, I don't want to put the success of my project on a technology that needs "revitalization".  

Amber is leading edge technology. Amber has a set of real benefits. Javascript provides the runtime VM and is ubiquitous.  There are lots of great stats to support the growth of Javascript.  Amber makes Javascript shine. Meteor is riding Javascript's coattails, presenting benefits to optimize Javascript centric projects.  Javascript is not a productive language (see table below) and needs Amber's help. 

Occasionally, I write a reply to blog posts, trying to express my passion about the benefits of Smalltalk. Such posts fall on deaf ears. My conclusion, unless you've used Smalltalk or viewed a competent  Smalltalker in action, there will be no interest.  Here's a post, pasted below, expressing my attempt to reply to a "Static Typing is Supperior..." blog post.  I could have written it better. I didn't bother to tune-it.  In hind-sight, I would not make any negative statements and would rewrite any parts that could be mistaken for elitist. I'm learning, it's always best to remove "ego" from human interactions. 

--- start pasted post ---

This post attempts to shed light on Static Typing versus Dynamic Typing, using Smalltalk and C#.

Flexibility is beneficial and crucial to problem solving. When we lack flexibility, we paint ourselves into a corner.  Programming languages are tools. We need to select the right tool for the job.  Else, this quote describes our limitations:

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

Static vs Dynamic Typing has become a religious argument. Lets not drink the purple Cool-Aid. (a reference to cult followers consuming cyanide-laced Cool-Aid <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FJim_Jones\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNF2_i9alGA4-DcnDLDXM514YOW36A';return true;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones )

I've used both statically typed, C# most recently. And, Smalltalk on the dynamic front.  In my experience, using C#, after Smalltalk is like going back to using a typewriter with white-out, after using a word processor.  Smalltalk is the dynamic word processor. I am 3x more productive with Smalltalk.  I reach a state of mastery faster and more often when using Smalltalk.

For supportive reading, here's a well written article on the topic: <a href="http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fsmalltalk.org%2Farticles%2Farticle_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNH7kV9zIoSWzMxjBQc4iwgkwc42iw';return true;">http://smalltalk.org/articles/article_20070928_a1_ContinuousNuisanceDoubleTypeCognitiveDissonanceTax_v1.html

Visual Studio vs Smalltalk IDE example

In my Smalltalk IDE, I can select any method, right-click and instantly open a list of all implementors and/or all callers of that method. It's just part of the meta-data.  I want re-usable code, so polymorphic method names are a good thing. A simple example, send the "print" message to any object, letting the object definition encapsulate how to print any object type, or defer to the super-class' generic implementation.

For decades, in Smalltalk, most code could be edited in the debugger, saved (incrementally compiled) and optionally continue running your program. Visual Studio has a partial implementation for .NET languages, not even close to Smalltalk's ability to edit in debuggers, inspectors and other dynamic tools. 

I don't want to sound religious about Smalltalk, but I do prefer a word processor to a typewriter. That's my reality.  Still, I do need to focus on the-best-tool-for-the-job. C# has a place in my toolbox.

Dynamically Typed Smalltalk Shown to be Most Productive

There are many ways to measure productivity and code quality.  Ultimately, total effort per function point is a useful one. On page 46 of <a href="http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Fnamcookanalytics.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F07%2FFunction-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHVvudAy3a1g3u76NqgBYvBdn-IhA';return true;">http://namcookanalytics.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Function-Points-as-a-Universal-Software-Metric2013.pdf a table sets out number of months to implement a 1,000 function point program.  Here's a few metrics for dynamics and static languagues:

Smalltalk   21 coding months

Ruby        46

C#          51

Python      53

C++         53

Java        53

PHP         53

JavaScript  71

C          128

Assembly   213

Smalltalk AND .NET

In my work, I've decided to use both highly productive Smalltalk and .NET with C# for Windows and server apps. 

Here's a Smalltalk for .NET, a work-in-progress (just the language, no classic Smalltalk IDE or debuggers yet). Code can be developed in Pharo or VisualWorks Smalltalk, then migrated to Essence#

<a href="https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.google.com/url?q\75https%3A%2F%2Fessencesharp.wordpress.com%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNGTwbrSTUyKW7Cmw2vXfaBFsh-VnA';return true;">https://essencesharp.wordpress.com/

Smalltalk AND Javascript

For client-side web apps, Smalltalk and JavaScript. Here's a tool that compiles Smalltalk to JavaScript:

<a href="http://amber-lang.net/" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;" onclick="this.href='http://www.google.com/url?q\75http%3A%2F%2Famber-lang.net%2F\46sa\75D\46sntz\0751\46usg\75AFQjCNHWL5ICufAxmeHv3OKnXbetcV4-aQ';return true;">http://amber-lang.net/

I can manipulate JavaScript objects with Smalltalk, vice-versa.  Amber's web browser hosted dynamic tutorial is being upgraded to the most recent version of Amber. Check back later for the interactive tutorial that teases, "Got 5 minutes? ...  

Learning Overhead

Smalltalk has 5 keywords.  C++ has more than 50 keywords.  Learning Smalltalk is quick, easy and will teach you design patterns to make you better with other languages. Take a look: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4" style="color:rgb(17,85,204)" target="_blank" onmousedown="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;" onclick="this.href='https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\75eGaKZBr0ga4';return true;">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGaKZBr0ga4