Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site orca.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!brucec From: brucec@orca.UUCP Newsgroups: net.lang.st80 Subject: Rosetta Smalltalk (reposting) Message-ID: <989@orca.UUCP> Date: Wed, 8-Aug-84 12:14:31 EDT Article-I.D.: orca.989 Posted: Wed Aug 8 12:14:31 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Aug-84 02:14:44 EDT Sender: brucec@orca.UUCP Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR Lines: 36 [Reposted by request; the article-eater zapped me.] >> Rosetta Smalltalk was written by Scott K. Warren and Dennis Abbe of >> Rosetta, Inc., 5925 Kirby Drive, Houston, Tx 77005. They had a prototype >> Z80 version running in 1979, and later, under contract to Intel, worked >> on versions for newer microprocessors. I believe Intel paid for the new >> versions and never used them. Intel did in fact market Rosetta Smalltalk on the iAPX 432 processor (the 432-100 board, which plugs into an Intel "blue box") as OPL (for Object Programming Language). This made some sense, since they had no other real demos for the 432. I had one of the beasts in my system when I worked at Intel, and I still have the OPL manual. OPL was a real dog for performance, largely because of a *really* bad hardware architecture in the 432-100 board design. The 432 was forced to go onto the Multibus for every memory access, and the bus interface was screwed up so that if you didn't modify the system, each access cost >100 microseconds (16 bits wide, in my system). I have a feeling that, if Intel had been serious about either Smalltalk or the 432, that we would be seeing amazing things now, but as it is, they have effectively tubed both. C'est la vie ... C'est le guerre ... C'est what? Bruce Cohen UUCP: ...!tektronix!orca!brucec CSNET: orca!brucec@tektronix ARPA: orca!brucec.tektronix@rand-relay USMail: M/S 61-183 Tektronix, Inc. P.O. Box 1000 Wilsonville, OR 97070