Checking the QKS website, SmallScript (aka Smalltalk 2000) isn't
available yet (4th Q 2000 they say! - looks like the schedule
slipped).
There seems to be another product called Smallscript from the UK
that's $485/user. Seems to be some sort of runtime for IBM Visual Age
Smalltalk.
Dave LeBlanc
On Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:11:43 GMT, Keith Ray
<k1e2i3t4h5r6a7y at 1m2a3c4.5c6o7m> wrote:
>In article <mailman.987684754.31126.python-list at python.org>, "Chris
>Gonnerman" <chris.gonnerman at usa.net> wrote:
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Andrew Dalke" <dalke at acm.org>
>> Subject: python on the smalltalk VM
>>
>>
>> > http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com/html/SmalltalkSolutions2001%232.html
>>
>> This URL appears dead to me... is there an alternate location?
>
>I don't have a problem loading the URL
><http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com/html/SmalltalkSolutions2001%232.html>
>
>Here is a snippet from that page:
>
>After the break I attended the Building COM and .NET in SmallScript by
>David Simmons for a few minutes
>
>About 70 people in attendence. Standing room only.
>
>David talked about his Smallscript goals, he then launched into an
>explanation of how Smallscript is build by showing us the source code.
>If you were a Microsoft developer this would have been very interesting,
>and it is interesting to see how it all interfaced to the existing MS
>framework for development.
>
>David's take is that Smalltalk is built wrong for scripting, it has a
>monolithic image. It really should be a bunch of Smalltalk pieces.
>Smallscript isn't a Smalltalk traditional image. It's the best features
>of the language but changed for doing scripting.
>
>SmallScript is small, it is free, it's not an IDE. It's a compiler and
>execution engine. Someone else needs to build an IDE and frameworks, QKS
>may build a simple IDE but these aren't an important part of their
>research. Smallscript like all scripting languages is text based just
>tackle it with your emac editor.
>
>Someone asked what is the revenue model for QKS?
>It's not tools (We all know that today, look around how many tools
>companies are there?)
>Consulting is a big part
>Microsoft is a big part.
>Python is a big part for the execution engine, this is a new area. The
>Smalltalk VM runs Python 10 to 100x faster. {JMM I should point out the
>Perl and Python folks are working toward having/wanting/needing a
>universal VM}
>
>SmallScript is subset of Smalltalk dialects, not of the frameworks. You
>can migrate frameworks, and it has a lot of features for foreign
>function interoperability.
>
>David then moved on within his slides and talked about the files you
>need to support Smallscript. The point being there are only a few small
>files required.
>
>He then brought up the VisualStudio project for building this and
>explained how the VM starts and worked us thru what happens when the VM
>launches. The execution path is very short and took about 85ms on this
>machine, thus 12 executions a second. A more optimized VM, this was a
>test VM, would run faster. However David pointed out on a heavier loaded
>machine you could have at least a 30ms variation in startup times
>because of system load. But the key point here was that you can run a
>lot of individual scripts per second if required.
>
>Later at lunch David pointed out that perhaps it wasn't clear in the
>presentation that the entire image is built from the class definitions
>at startup, there is NO image. It's all built from the definitions
>really really fast. On termination a module can decide if it must save a
>persistent state, which could be loaded on restarting. In fact If I
>recall correctly he say that a rather large smalltalk image would be
>built by the engine in less than 6 seconds. From nothing to a known
>state on each startup, this is a important concept.
>
>On-ware to DLL hell, well maybe not. .Net get out of this problem
>domain. Components are self describing and have versioning which allows
>you to resolve all the requirements to run an application and to move
>things around without harming the application. Smallscript allows you to
>build small DLLS which are compiled very quickly. Smallscript takes the
>strengths of Smalltalk, it's a simple grammar it's untyped. And it's
>easy to refactor and change versus C or C++. In Smalltalk it was hard to
>deal with the outside, handing a Smalltalk object to an external DLL
>is/was an adventure. In .Net it just gets passed, no wrapping or
>marshalling etc.
>
>Alas at this point I had an errand to run.
>
>--
> <http://homepage.mac.com/keithray/resume.html>
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4