Blog

Is Ruby a Smalltalk?

Is Ruby a Smalltalk?

Ruby is a popular language, largely because of Rails. Ruby borrows OOP from Smalltalk, but otherwise is a very much different language. Ruby appeals to programmers because of its clean, simpler syntax. However, Smalltalk is the ultimate in clean, simple, and minimalist.

Does Golang compile to native code?

Yes. it’s compiling exactly in the same sense any C program is compiled.

Can Golang be interpreted?

Go is expressive, concise, clean, and efficient. Go compiles quickly to machine code yet has the convenience of garbage collection and the power of run-time reflection. It’s a fast, statically typed, compiled language that feels like a dynamically typed, interpreted language.

Is it possible to use Smalltalk with a python IDE?

However, Smalltalk is was designed to be used with an IDE (in fact, Smalltalk was the original graphical IDE) and still has some nice features not replicated by other systems. Testing code with highlight and ‘Show it’ is still a very nice feature that I have never seen in a Python IDE, although I can’t speak for Ruby.

READ ALSO:   Is it safe to travel to Coorg today?

What happened to Smalltalk as an embedded scripting language?

Smalltalk never really gained a body of hybrid application support in the way that Python and Ruby have, so the concept of ‘smalltalk as embedded scripting language’ never caught on. As an aside, Java was not the easiest thing to interface with other code bases (JNI is fairly clumsy), but that did not stop it from gaining mindshare.

What is the difference between Smalltalk and Python and Ruby?

The architecture of Smalltalk is somewhat insular whereas Python and Ruby were built from the ground up to facilitate integration. Smalltalk never really gained a body of hybrid application support in the way that Python and Ruby have, so the concept of ‘smalltalk as embedded scripting language’ never caught on.

Why is it so hard to decompile byte-code?

At every step of compilation you lose information that is irrecoverable. The more information you lose from the original source, the harder it is to decompile. You can create a useful de-compiler for byte-code because a lot more information is preserved from the original source than is preserved when producing the final target machine code.