What went so wrong?

It was proprietary for far too long, the asking price was insane at the time when the competition was far cheaper.

File: large.jpg (44KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 600x400px

>goldberg

No programming language that costs money will ever rise to prominence again.

Bloat IDE with no sandboxing. Had to use the Dolphin IDE for a project @uni. Worst 10h if my life.

Too slow.

>>62404922
graphical programming interface designed at Xerox PARC when personal computers with graphical interfaces dont exist
Xerox has no idea what they have so everyone at Xerox PARC is hired by Apple
>Too slow.
try again

File: smalltalk_is_fucking_slow.png (30KB, 664x372px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 664x372px

>>62405099
> try again
It could have been x3 times slower than C in the 90s, but now it's like x10-x100 times slower because of the way modern CPUs work, mostly cache locality.

Stupid name.

>>62405185

This whole "langauge a is x times slower than langauge b" is such nonsense..

1) Let's start with the fact that you can't compare languages, only implermentations.

2) Let's also not ignore that it's about time/money. C++ or Java are so fast because of how much time was spend to make super-optimized code. It's not they are "better designed" or something.

3) Then consider that fact that there is no single language that is the fastest for every problem. There are benchmarks where Lisp is as fast as C or even faster! But that are specific problems where Lisp can play out their strength. Or if you compare C++ and Java, what and how do you maesure? Do you count startup time of the virtual machine? Or do you measure form a "warm machine"? Benchmarking is incredibly difficult and you should never believe a one-dimensional comparison between languages, because "it's faster on average" just doesn't cut it.

4) Benchmakrs are statistics, and statistics are always subjective measures. I'm not saying everyone is trying to lie, but often you find that people are using sub-par implementations for comparison.
Just one example:
I write a Ruby programm that does some heavy math. Oh look, Ruby is so slow!
What is wrong here? I would never chose Ruby for something with lots of math, it's not the reason why you use a scripting langauge. But if I had to, I can just include native C files by FFI and execute the calculations in C speed. Boom! Your whole benchmark is wrong because you measured something that will never happen in reality..

5) It gets even more complicated when concurrency is involved. "Java is faster than Erlang" means jack shit, when you can spaw thousands of lightway processes in Eralng in no time vs. threads in Java.

6) When it comes to websites, it all starts getting ridiculous. What does "fast" even mean here? Latency? Throughput? And if the slowest point is my database connection, does it even count? Or shouldn't I rather measure the DB..?

>>62405625
>implermentations
Sorry, didn't read any further.

>>62405625
Wew, you're really mad, aren't you?
> C++ or Java are so fast because of how much time was spend to make super-optimized code.
C++ is so fast because it has been designed with zero-cost abstractions in mind, while any dynamically-typed late-binding message-passing language is inherently slow.
> Then consider that fact that there is no single language that is the fastest for every problem.
Yeah, this is why there are a lot of benchmarks for every language and the chart shows the average. Yet still the faster Smalltalk implementations is 10x slower than C.
>Benchmakrs are statistics, and statistics are always subjective measures.
This is, like, the opposite of the truth, m8.
>"Java is faster than Erlang" means jack shit, when you can spaw thousands of lightway processes in Eralng in no time vs. threads in Java.
What it has to do with something? These thousands of lightweight processes would be an order of magnitude slower than Java's native threads.
>When it comes to websites, it all starts getting ridiculous.
Who said anything about web sites?

But anyway, you're welcome to improve Smalltak implementations of the benchmarks: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/smalltalk.html

>>62405625
> My favourite language is not slow! Just write the slow parts in another (faster) language, and use the FFI, Boom!
You sure opened my eyes.

Also, the fact that some languages are not created for best performance and bring other advantages (which they do) does not change the fact that they are slow as fuck.

>>62405870

>C++ is so fast because it has been designed with zero-cost abstractions in mind

Brainlet. And why are today's compilers so much faster? Why do they produce code that is faster than any assemby men could write? Agressive optimization maybe?

I'd suggest to take a look at :
>https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dn904673.aspx


>This is, like, the opposite of the truth, m8.

Dude, I've done so much statistics in my life. You can literally "prove" anything, if you know how. Just asking sightly differnt questiosn will bring you totally differnt results.

>What it has to do with something?

Oh boy, I dont even know where to start. Let's just say that "number crunching" is not the only way to measure the "speed" of a language. Depending on the scenario you can have various bottlenecks.

>Who said anything about web sites?

I just tried to show that it's a multi-dimensional topic. Today concurrency is even an issue on single (multicore) machines.

>But anyway, you're welcome to improve Smalltak implementations

Why should I?
I'm not a smalltalk fanboy, I just wanted to say that your way of approaching the quality of a language by quoting some benchmarks is plain wrong.


>>62406909

What do you mean with "slow as fuck"?

Today the computing power is incredibly high, so even if you run a "slow" language today, it would still be faster than a C programm in the 80s.

Also you didn't get the point:
You use scripting languages to abstract away the details. you trade developer time (= expensive, rare) against computing power (= cheap, scalable).
If I want to read in a file, split the content and save it as 7 differnt files with an auto generated name, I don't f*cking care if it takes 5 seconds or 2 seconds to process. But I do care if it takes 6 lines or 60 lines of code.

Different programming languages are differnt tools:
"Hurry, look at the silly saw, you can even hammer a nail with it!"
That's how silly you sound to me.

>>62405185
>Lua
Where is LuaJIT