2005-10-07 #1

The Case for Dynamic Languages

In Sam Ruby's slides on The Case for Dynamic Languages, he shows how "modern" dynamic languages are converging to what Smalltalk was 30 years ago. It makes you wonder why people don't just use Smalltalk? The possible answers that I can think of are:

1.Smalltalk has "funny" syntax

2.Smalltalk is image rather than file based - GNU Smalltalk doesn't use an image and yet it still isn't popular so I don't think that this is the main issue. I've always seen this as an advantage anyway.

3.Ageism - Smalltalk is an old language and so it must therefore be bad. Ruby, Python, etc. are all newer so must therefore be better. Historically, server resources were too precious to be wasted on inefficient languages like Smalltalk. Nowadays this isn't usually an issue but the stigma has stuck. If Smalltalk had been invented five years ago instead of thirty-five years ago, then I think that there would be more new adopters today.

4.Availability - Squeak is freely available but is has a gaudy and childish interface.