smalltalk

I doubt Seaside and GNU Smalltalk have much in common...one being a framework and the other a smalltalk environment.

So Smalltalk is not dying because someone who sells Smalltalk IDE says so?

The reference to increased sales is true for both VA Smalltalk and Gemstone.

I learned to code at age 7 with QBasic, deconstructing Gorrilas in DOS, and later SmallTalk.

I would also consider buying a license for a commercial Smalltalk if that was the case.

Unfortunately, my Smalltalk skills are weak, but it is a great language.

I really dig smalltalk, especially the Pharo project, which I believe is a fork of Squeak.

I had a loaner Smalltalk license in the early 1980s for my Xerox Lisp Machine.

I don't remember what my reasoning was, so maybe GNU Smalltalk deserves another look.

While I agree it's less succinct, syntactically, I feel Basic reads easier than Smalltalk - especially to someone with no programming exposure.

It's a command-line smalltalk that interfaces well with unix.

What I'd be more curious about is whether GNU Smalltalk can run Seaside...

[edit: I should bracket this with something about how when I am talking about OOP languages here, I was not thinking about Smalltalk] What I was getting at is that Object Oriented Programming Languages are typically presented in "popular culture" as something discrete and concrete: that C++ is as discontinuous with Scheme as walruses are with penguins.

For one, this was Pharo Smalltalk; a fork of Squeak that's still in beta.

Smalltalk is that, at least for OO (though it does have lambda objects too).

Smalltalk is seriously mind-bending for those who come from more routine languages/environments.