On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 08:07 +0200, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > Michael > This is not a question for us. Let us face it seriously we are not > expert on VM building
That is right. So this is a problem changing the code and maintaining our own vm. It's too much work without the necessary expertise. But on the other side the combination of vmmaker/slang/c does also not attract anyone to get into the vm stuff. So we would be bound to that a long time. Wouldn't Spy (http://pypysqueak.blogspot.com/) be a benefit in the long run. I'm very interested in vm stuff (at the moment just reading). For me it is much more attractive approach I would try to dive into. My opinion is that it is more flexible and opens worlds like LLVM (http://llvm.org/) and friends for us. What do you think? > for the moment. Now we may start to build them. And yes using git > would be a good idea. > Stef > A lot of people are using git these days. So this must have something good. Norbert > > On Aug 31, 2008, at 10:54 PM, Michael Rueger wrote: > > > Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > > >> It means that we should then produce our own VMs I imagine. So what > >> are the plans there? > > > > Knowing that I'm touching flame bait here, but how is the general > > consensus on continuing to use VMMaker and Slang for generating VMs? > > Alternatives could be pure C code and/or code management using Git. > > > > Michael > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
