mikl

From my understanding, to adopt Smalltalk, I’d have to give up my editor, my SCM, my code review practises, my deployment strategies, my whole way of working. Learning a new language is already a big ask. If you then also require the would-be adopter to change everything around the language, everything about how they work, don’t be surprised if people choose something else.

I think a modern parallel is darklang.com. It might be great, but it faces the same resistance for the same reasons.

You can do some amazing things if you integrate everything into a big monolith, but that also makes it impossible to adopt a technology part-way.

jdboyd
Giving up your editor to tough, so I'll come back to that. I believe that Pharo and some other smalltalks no longer require giving up Git[1], and by extension, I assume that would allow keeping any git based review strategies. Some deployment strategies can also be kept largely intact[2][3], but I don't know what you give up by doing so. In those links, a lot of things aren't done how I would do them, but I can see how to adopt what is shown there to my preferred deployment tools.

Getting back to giving up your editor. It should be possible to use many editors with the smalltalk of your choice. However, in practice, there are many half finished and abandoned tools for doing so[4], and fighting with that while learning the system is unlikely to be productive.

[1] https://github.com/pharo-vcs/iceberg [2] https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/EnterprisePharoBo... [3] https://www.slideshare.net/umejava/dockerizing-pharo [4] https://dmitrymatveev.co.uk/shampoo/