Please, at least google the person who responds before answering.
I made my life (and my family life) from 1987 with diferente implementations of Smalltalk. With and without image container; slow VM based and very fast VM based implementations; with linking to 3D UI and with text UI, etc…
>I’m sorry, but this is all rubbish.
It depends on what can YOU do with Smalltalk after reading what I put here.
I have founded the basis of most Object Technology advances in Spanish spoken communities with the concepts written here during more than 30 years; where we used Smalltalk all the time.
>Smalltalk is a programming language just like Python, Ruby, Objective-C, Java, etc. It’s imperative and object-oriented, just like these languages.
For people considering ONLY Smalltalk “the language” it is true. They produce the same (an application) with smalltalk, or any object ORIENTED language.
Have you reflected about the “O in the middle”?
It reveals something that is founded in true Object Technology (you can find references about object technology in the ages of greeks, see e.g. the “School of Athens” painting; the figures in the middle form a representation of the “cycles of experience” technique, an activity to produce expertice, similar to the cycles smalltalkers do)
>Like Ruby and Java, Smalltalk is based on a language virtual machine.
>The only difference is that Smalltalk is wrapped around by a system image, which is conceptually the same as the system image in virtualization software like VMware and VirtualBox.
That was true in the ’80s and with some smalltalks after that decades (e.g. Squeak based smalltalks). But there has been a lot of advance in smalltalk development, using dynamic modules, etc…
>Smalltalk is used to write the exact same kind of applications
> as these other languages.
What is sold as an application is NOT the product of using smalltalk.
Smalltalk produces changes in the mind.
One of the side effects that image-based smalltalks produce on people is ostracism; loose of interest in communication, etc. This affected the grown of people using smalltalk.
>This includes web applications (both back and front ends), desktop applications, mobile applications, embedded applications, numerical computing, you name it, it’s been written in Smalltalk.
Yes, please see u8.smalltalking.net
There you will find some works on that modes of executing smalltalk systems.
For that way of running smalltalk, we do not use a smalltalk VM.
>Yes, Smalltalk has other special qualities, too. Remarkable
> qualities. It supports live coding,
Code is not relevant anymore.
Do you know what is the main reason to use objects?
>In short, you don’t know what you’re talking about
Again, I know what I am talking about. I’m sure you learned to ride a bike after I made my first smalltalk system.
You don´t know what I am talking about.
You have option to read my words again and make questions.
I do not have option to forget what I have learned using smalltalk (and explaining OT concepts) during more than 30years.
All I said here is with respect to a person I have not had the opportunity to meet face to face.
Please relax, take your time, and make questions; the text you published is an oportunity to learn based on the experiences of others that read your text.
If you think that the fruits of your text is what have you help others to use smalltalk… please consider that again (smalltalk do not spread horizontally, I have explained why)