Re: re: reviewing the simulator fixes

Hi Tim,

> > That would be fine with me. I did intend at one point to make two
> > separate packages (VM & VMMaker)...
>>
> You should be able to simply rename it (as packages use UUIDs as refs for
> the most part). In fact, if you want to do it, I'd say definitely do it
> before 3.6 gets finalized and choose a nice name such as "Squeak Virtual
> Machine" or somesuch ;-)
>

    If VMMaker is renamed as "Squeak Virtual Machine" (or somesuch,
    like SqVM ;-) then it might tickle the VM maintainers to have a
    'really closer' look at it.

    Then, who knows, there may be even an anouncement for 'PCP'
    (no, it's not 'Peer Cleans Peer', but , 'Plugins Cleaning Project' ;-)

>> ... but since the VM code is pretty much
> > pointless without the tools to use it I thought better of it.
>>
> In any case, I agree with your reasoning that for the most part the VM is
> pretty useless without VMMaker and I don't see much of a reason to
> separate the two.
>

    And we can even  make VMMaker isa Interpreter (can we, can we, can we
    with a cherry on top ;-)

    Cheers,

    PhiHo.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Raab" <[email protected]>
To: "'Discussing the Squeak Foundation'"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2003 5:36 PM
Subject: RE: [Squeakfoundation]re: reviewing the simulator fixes


> Tim,
>
> > 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?
>
> You should be able to simply rename it (as packages use UUIDs as refs for
> the most part). In fact, if you want to do it, I'd say definitely do it
> before 3.6 gets finalized and choose a nice name such as "Squeak Virtual
> Machine" or somesuch ;-)
>
> In any case, I agree with your reasoning that for the most part the VM is
> pretty useless without VMMaker and I don't see much of a reason to
separate
> the two.
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation