Re: LFM + LFSP = LFE?

[Avi Bryant <address@hidden>]

On Wed, 11 Jun 2003, Michael Vanier wrote:

> Smalltalk: originally designed to allow children (!) to program in, but
> includes sophisticated features like metaclasses as well as blocks (sort of
> like lambda expressions without lexical scoping AFAICT).

Actually blocks do have lexical scope; in some dialects, the scoping is
slightly broken (you can't call blocks recursively, for example), but most
modern Smalltalks have "full block closure" semantics, and those that
don't are working to get them.

The thing is that I wouldn't consider Smalltalk a Language for the Masses
- although it's great for children and others with uncorrupted minds, it's
a struggle to break hardened developers free of their addictions to emacs
and edit/compile/run cycles, and get them comfortable with a real object
environment.  If the Masses that mattered were motivated children rather
than close-minded adults, we'd be a lot better off in lots of ways...

Avi