When comparing Smalltalk vs Bash (Bourne-Again SHell), the Slant community recommends Smalltalk for most people. In the question“What is the best programming language to learn first?” Smalltalk is ranked 15th while Bash (Bourne-Again SHell) is ranked 34th. The most important reason people chose Smalltalk is:
You can modify the system as it's running. You're "swimming with the fish", instead of probing a black box by remote control.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Environment of live objects
You can modify the system as it's running. You're "swimming with the fish", instead of probing a black box by remote control.
Pro Easy to learn and experiment
Pro Inspector makes objects transparent
Programmers must make detailed mental models of the system they are developing. Bugs usually happen when the mental model does not match the actual system. This is one of the greatest difficulties beginners have because most systems are so opaque. It takes a lot of effort to see what's really going on. But in Smalltalk this is much easier, thanks to the powerful tools included in the environment, like the object inspector.
Pro Superb Integrated Development Environment (IDE)
All tools (Inspector, Browser, Debugger etc.) are written in Smalltalk and are live objects in the environment. All sources are present, so that the tools can easily be studied, changed and experimented with.
The same goes for the other components like the compiler, OS-Integration etc.
Pro Pure and easy object orientation
Smalltalk is one of few languages that are purely object oriented. This provides a solid and easy to understand base on which to learn object oriented programming, the most popular approach to programming.
Pro Elegant syntax fits on a postcard
The syntax was designed to be easy enough for children to learn. Beginners can learn the language rules very quickly and then focus on programming without fighting the syntax at the same time. Things that have to be baked into the grammar in other languages are simple message sends with block arguments in Smalltalk. Expressions have only three precedence levels to worry about.
Pro Agile "interactive" test-driven development
Smalltalk had the original (and still the best) unit test system that inspired it in many other languages (like Java's JUnit). Working with interactive live objects in Smalltalk style TDD makes it easy to teach and learn TDD.
Pro Powerful integrated debugger
You can edit code and swap it in while the program is still running after an exception has already been signaled, or restart from anywhere in the call stack. You can inspect and modify the state of any object. Some Smalltalkers write unit tests and then program exclusively in the debugger.
Pro Internal source code and documentation
You can explore how everything works easily.
Pro Incremental compilation
Smalltalk provides an extremely fast code-compile-run-debug cycle. You don't have to stop and reset the world to tweak your program, since you can compile one method at a time while the environment is still running. This is great for beginners to experiment and prototype ideas.
Pro Inspired many other languages' object systems
Pro Open source
MIT licensed implementations Pharo, Squeak, Cuis & Dolphin
and GPL licensed GnuSmalltalk.
Pro Save and restore virtual machine image
A Smalltalk environment can save the state of a running program and later restore and resume execution. This includes the internal state of live objects, multiple thread stacks, and debugging sessions, making it easier for beginners to take the exact problem to an expert for assistance.
Pro Language uniformity
This leads to a very simple programming model (pure OO) that is still very powerful. A lot of stuff that is hard to implement in other languages is easier in Smalltalk.
Pro Graphical user interface
Beginners are usually stuck making command-line applications in other languages, because GUIs are too hard. Smalltalk GUIs are easy enough to start with.
Pro First-class functions with lexical closures
Also known as "blocks". These objects contain reusable snippets of code and as first-class objects they can be passed as arguments to other methods or blocks and also returned from them. "lexical closures" mean they retain access to the variables in the lexical environment they were written in, that is, in the surrounding code.
Pro It invented a lot of stuff
Smalltalk is the inventor of Just-in-Time compilation and the MVC concept, refactoring through their so-called refactoring browser and it was also one of the first adopters of a language virtual machine, closures, live programming, test driven development, an IDE and the development of GUI`s.
Pro As a first language, almost forces you to learn OO design
Hybrid languages (e.g., Java, C#, C++) make it easy to slip into procedural thinking. Smalltalk's pure OO approach makes it hard not to think in object-oriented terms. In addition, since the entire IDE and runtime components are there in the image for you to browse, you have plenty of examples of good OO design to learn from.
Pro Provides a functional way to interact with objects
Many languages today use object orientation, while the most of them stock on the half way in that perspective.
Smalltalk sees literally everything as an object and this includes things like the classes and primitive data types. There is are zero control structures such as selection and iteration, since all is done by sending messages to objects.
It use a lot of concepts from Lisp in order to provide a nice experience for this pure kind of object orientation.
It provides immutable data structures, closures, anonymous functions and higher order functions, while all those functions are objects. This is what makes Smalltalk so simple, elegant, and easy.
All this counts for Pharo, while other implementations as Amber are probably feature complete to it.
Pro Default shell on most systems
Bash is the default shell on virtually every UNIX system. Making it very portable across different systems and once you get used to it, you can use it everywhere.
Pro Plenty of examples and tutorials
Since this is very mature shell there is a lot of great examples and other resources describing how to do almost everything.
Pro Rich scripting capabilities on a single line
Want to run something 5 times? Write a throw-away loop: for i in 1 2 3 4 5; do date; done
If you need it 100 times? Not a problem: for i in {1..100}; do date; done
or: for ((i=0; i<100; ++i)); do date; done
How about emailing yourself when remote server is back online? Sure thing: while ! ping -c1 example.com &>/dev/null; do date; sleep 5; done && mailx -s 'server is back!' me@myself.com
Pro POSIX compatible
Pro Emacs-like keyboard control
By default, BASH uses shortcuts and concepts very similar to Emacs, so learning one often results in familiarity with the other.
Pro Rich built-in features
By default, there are many built-in features. They make really complex and reliable programs possible. In comparison to dash, for example, you can do the same tasks in less time and fewer lines of code.
Pro Variables and aliases are listed the way they are built
alias
and set
will list aliases and variables in a format that can be run directly with no modifications. Even if the values contain \n.
This is handy if you want to modify a value.
Pro Recursive globbing
ls **/*.log
for example is supported by Bash if you set shopt -s globstar
.
Pro Man page is a trove of wonders
While the manual "page" is nearly a hundred pages long, it is actually surprisingly succinct and stuffed with good information. It is often better than Googling for answers when writing shell scripts. The way it is written makes it easy to stumble upon useful new programming features just by flipping through it .
NOTE: If you find it dense and hard to read at the command line, look for the PDF version.
Pro vi mode is more comprehensive than on other shells
Vi editing mode works without a glitch. "_" will print you the last argument of the latest command (zsh won't). VI mode is fast off the bat - You don't have to reset any variable (like "KEYTIMEOUT" in zsh) for that.
Pro Copyright license is GPL 3+
Bash is licensed under the GNU General Public License ≥3, which gives much stronger assurances that the right to use it can't be restricted.
For example, Microsoft would not be able to claim in court that, even though they've distributed Bash with the GPLv3, a license that explicitly grants people freedom, now Bash is essentially proprietary due to software patents and everyone who uses Bash owes them money. (This may sound ludicrous to those who were not alive when Microsoft tried a similar scheme against Linux fifteen years ago).
The GPLv3 is a license that reflects the genuine ethical issues that arise when people give their time and skills to collaboratively build software. While most people wouldn't insist that their UNIX shell is licensed under the GPLv3+, it does matter and is a big PRO for Bash.
Pro Built-in 'help'... helps a lot
Built-in 'help' provides quick and efficient help on builtins and keywords.
Pro Rich scripting capabilities
BASH scripting is a rich and robust language.
Cons
Con OO is becoming obsolete
Smalltalk did it best, but the whole paradigm is a poor fit for the expected future multicore processors. Isolated mutable variables with no compile checks is a recipe for race conditions in multithreaded code. Beginners would be better off learning a functional language.
Con Not common
Smalltalk missed an opportunity to become mainstream when its implementations cost $5000 per seat versus $0 open source. New open source implementations (Pharo, Squeak) have minor corporate backers but not yet an IT behemoth. Direct jobs are scarce (but indirectly Smalltalk experience is very well regarded). Online communities are relatively small.
Con Not useful for mobile development
While Smalltalk is very powerful and easy to learn, it doesn't have a well supported mobile distribution, but you'll be spoiled for working in mainstream languages like Java, Swift or Kotlin where jobs are more readily available.
Con Virtual machine in its own isolated world
Smalltalk wants to be the whole OS. While this has tremendous advantages internally, interacting with the world outside the VM is not as easy as pure Smalltalk and must be done via a Foreign Function Interface.
Con Non-standard arithmetic ordering
Since every operation is considered a message sent sent is a specific order, all arithmetic operators have the same precedence. E.g. 2 + 3 x 4 translates to 2 + 3, and the result is multiplied by 4, giving an answer of 24 (instead of the correct answer - 14). Once you are learn this, it can easily handled using brackets, e.g. 2 + (3 x 4), but still a momentary suprise for beginners.
Con Extremely complicated and inconsistent rules
In Bash, exceptions are the rule, not even all being described by the main page.
There are a grand total of 5 different ways of quoting, sometimes even when one does not want to, for instance in command substitutions. These are all based around preserving the literal meaning of every character, with an exception list. There is even an exception list to the exception list in 4 of the 5, regarding how the backslash behaves! The behavior of the backslash is also one of the quoting rules, so naturally, it also has an exception in how it works when it stands before a newline as compared to other characters.
Bash has several layers of interpretations, all to be kept in mind:
The ~ expands to the home of the current user. So if you store it in a variable, can you use it that way? Nope: tilde expansion comes before variable expansion.
Aha, so that's how it works! Then, since applying quotation happens after redirections are set up, it must mean that redirecting within quotes works, right? Nope: there is an exception! If a redirection symbol is not quoted, quotation around the symbol is observed, but is not removed. So, since variable expansion also comes after setting up redirections, and no exceptions are described here in the man page, getting the name of a file from a variable and using it as a target should not work, right? No: redirection does not actually take place when the symbols are being read, the symbols are merely removed and are noted for later, right before when the actual command runs.
Apart from 5 types of quotation, there are basically 2 quoting phases, 2 word splitting phases (with only one being controllable), and a tokenization phase on top of that.
If you have a command, it could be an alias, a special built in, a non-special built in, a symbolic link to a file, a regular file, a function, with different rules regarding how they can be overridden, if redirection happens before or after arguments have been passed (what does "time my_command 2>&1 >log_file" do?), etc.
This list is admittedly long, but it doesn't even scratch the surface of the bloat, complexity and inconsistencies of Bash.
Con GPL3 is not compatible with Apple's lawyers
Apple, one of the largest distributors of UNIX systems, only ships an ancient version of bash that predates the iPhone.
No one knows why as Apple hasn't said, but the version Apple includes in MacOS is from right before the license was updated to version 3 of the GNU GPL (General Public License). Other major companies (IBM, Microsoft) have had no problem shipping the latest version of bash
, so it's unclear what Apple's lawyers are averse to. The GPL has always said that if you distributed a program, you granted everyone the right to use it freely. The biggest change in version 3 was the addition, "...and that includes software patents."
This was necessary because back in 2006 Microsoft was demanding that any company that uses Linux pay them or get sued for infringing on their patents. They even took some companies, like TomTom, to court. No software which can be restricted retroactively like that is truly free, so GPL 3+ includes a clause saying that if you distribute the program, then you are also granting license to any patents you own that are necessary to run it.
What patents Apple has that bash could possibly infringe on is a mystery, but the bigger question is, Why does Apple even care? So what if they are granting people the right to run bash without being sued by Apple. It's not like they were planning on doing that, right?
Even though it is not bash's fault that it is not Apple Lawyer-approved, this is a CON for it because a lot of people use Apple products. While there are methods like brew
to install a current version of bash, Apple does not make it obvious to their customers what they are missing.
Con Compatibility can be a curse
One of bash's claims to fame is compatibility with previous versions of itself and historic shells. But, doing that means that new features are often written in tortured, awkward syntax that is not easy to learn. For example, bash uses the POSIX way of doing arithmetic: to add 5+3 you must put the numbers in double parentheses with a dollar sign at the start: x=$((5+3)). It is true that many shells suffer from this same CON, but since bash is such an important shell, it has less wiggleroom to ditch clunky ideas that might break existing scripts.
Con Lags behind on features compared to ZSH and Fish
People who wants power features or to customize their shell experience use zsh or fish.
Con Filename expansion is not consistent
filename expansion is not consistent. "echo *" will print the names of the files in your current dir, if there are any... and will print "*" if there are none.
Con Non-intuitive shell expansion in for loops
If there are no .sh files, this will print mask itself:
for filename in *.sh; do
echo $filename
done
Con No out-of-the-box command autocompletion
To have command autocompletion in bash you need to install third-party plug-ins.
Con One of the most dangerous languages around
What it is mostly used for are file system operations. Guess what it is bad at? Operating on files. It automatically splits and carries out filename expansion on every single string resulting from variable expansion and command substitution unless quoted, by default on whitespace, whilst spaces are very common in filenames.
Before that, it even does pathname expansion, so woe to anywone who does not want to actually operate on files, but has a globbing metacharacter stored anywhere in a variable.
This means what you store in a variable is not going to be what will ACTUALLY be accessed.
If an empty variable is unquoted, it disappears completely due to word splitting, sometimes leading to applications signalling a missing parameter at a wrong position.
If quoted however, said variables cannot be iterated over in a loop, no matter what character one uses for word splitting.
If you use any globbing pattern with a command, be sure to use -- after the option arguments or if none are present, before starting the pattern with a mandatory ./
Otherwise, another Bash script run gone wrong or a hacker can create files named like an option ("-f", for instance) and your program will happily accept it as such, if it results from globbing.
For interactive use, it is convenient. For programming, it is a no-go.