It depends who you ask what the big difference b/w Smalltalk and Lisp is.
Model-driven architecture weenies like me will tell you the biggest difference is methodological, and that real-time object-oriented systems engineering has its roots in most of Kay's ideas.
I'm not sure what you mean by the following:
@Lisp systems tend to use compile-time abstractions Lisp->machine code->execution
I don't think so. The whole reason I enjoy Lisp is for how it has inspired me to do streaming models of compilation. When you're updating things dynamically, the most important thing is to have a logical object model - starting with getting your "(UML) package diagram" correct. Otherwise you end up with a large system that requires the entire system to be locked up for minutes while you do the upgrade, because different parts of the system depend too much on physical model details. That's why you separate message from method. So you can do this in any language, some easier than others.
Model-driven architecture weenies like me will tell you the biggest difference is methodological, and that real-time object-oriented systems engineering has its roots in most of Kay's ideas.
I'm not sure what you mean by the following:
@Lisp systems tend to use compile-time abstractions Lisp->machine code->execution
I don't think so. The whole reason I enjoy Lisp is for how it has inspired me to do streaming models of compilation. When you're updating things dynamically, the most important thing is to have a logical object model - starting with getting your "(UML) package diagram" correct. Otherwise you end up with a large system that requires the entire system to be locked up for minutes while you do the upgrade, because different parts of the system depend too much on physical model details. That's why you separate message from method. So you can do this in any language, some easier than others.