Re: Digital Twin applied to Software

Tom,

After decades with Smalltalk, I certainly know how to use the language and how it compares to other languages. The desktop applications I've built are inherently complex, as is the associated UI.

If unit tests are required to uncover simple type mismatches, missing implementors and other trivial inconsistencies (if they can that at all - see previous post), that is a weakness of the language. Dynamic languages have many strengths, but this is clearly a downside compared to others and there is nothing newbie-ish with pointing this out. The criticism is not new either.

This Digital Twin idea encourages strong typing at the Smalltalk level (if only in the form of pragmas, annotations), which I find very interesting. Emphasizing its benefits seems logical to me.

Andre

--
> On 5. Dec 2022, at 10:52, Tom Robinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Andre,
> 
> It's clear that you are talking theoretically. If your UI is super complex, it's either unusual OR more commonly, your domain has leaked into the UI. Build a project in Smalltalk AND THEN critique the language. If you think Smalltalk silently swallows everything and keeps you in the dark until it's too late, you aren't developing tests as you develop your code and you aren't running them. If you grab a hammer by it's head, don't complain about how bad it is at driving nails.
> 
> Tom