Re: re: reviewing the simulator fixes

Bert Freudenberg <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > If you have VMMaker you've got the VM
> 
> ... which is not obvious at all. At least I would have expected the 
> "VMMaker" package to contain the VMMaker tool, not the VM source code 
> itself.
> 
> > and you can't simulate the interpreter without actually having it ;-)
> 
> Of course. It's just a naming confusion, but I would find it more 
> intuitive if there was a separate "VM" package containing ObjectMemory 
> and Interpreter, as well as the standard plugins.
> 
> -- Bert
> 
> PS:  I wouldn't even mind if the "VM" package contained the VMMaker 
> tool, too. Maybe we should just rename it?
That would be fine with me. I did intend at one point to make two
separate packages (VM & VMMaker) but since the VM code is pretty much
pointless without the tools to use it I thought better of it. The only
real cost would be finding all those places that refer to the VMMaker
package and updating them properly. Can SM do redirection?


tim
--
Tim Rowledge, [email protected], http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Strange OpCodes: PUS: PUrge System