Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!hookup!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!torn!nott!cunews!tina.mrco.carleton.ca!knight
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: C++ Productivity
Message-ID: <knight.793953696@tina.mrco.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: Carleton University
References: <D3zrpn.Hxq@research.att.com> <3htf7i$psa@news1.delphi.com> 	<LGM.95Feb26150506@polaris.ih.att.com> <3irdq1$sua@News1.mcs.com> <LGM.95Feb27174357@polaris.ih.att.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 1995 06:41:36 GMT
Lines: 19

Some people wrote, and I can't be bothered to figure out the attributions:

>   Are you saying that Smalltalk is "not realistically appropriate for
>   compilers or other systems programming"?

>No, but Mr. Sutherland appeared to imply that by saying that "We build
>our compiler technology in C++" and that "This seems like a pretty
>obvious way to do things."  I was, in fact, warning of the unfortunate
>implications of such statements.

I feel obliged to point out that most (I think that means all but Mr.
Sutherland's) Smalltalk compilers are in fact written in Smalltalk.


-- 
 Alan Knight                | The Object People
 knight@acm.org             | Smalltalk and OO Training and Consulting
 alan_knight@mindlink.bc.ca | 509-885 Meadowlands Dr.
 +1 613 225 8812            | Ottawa, Canada, K2C 3N2
