On 4 October 2017 at 22:30, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On 4 October 2017 at 17:27, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Igor Stasenko wrote >> > IMO, best would be to make it via compiler plugin. >> >> It seems there is always a tension between newbie-friendliness/purity and >> max-performance/deployment. There are so many other things about a >> Smalltalk >> image that are insecure and any compiler "tricks" are additional places to >> hang up the sizable community that doesn't need that security or >> efficiency. >> Would it be possible to implement it as Sven suggested and then provide a >> compiler plugin as part of a deployment hardening process like we used to >> have where e.g. tools are disabled, etc? >> >> Of course, you can have both: > - the actual implementation of message as fallback when compiler plugin is > not present > - the compiler plugin that does the magic, following same semantics > sorry, i meant 'you MUST have both', not 'you CAN have both' :) > >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >> >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
