> >> Ah, and the day has just 24h so don't expect anything from me beside the VM >> work, thats already enough to keep a whole team busy. > > This statement is true for most of us, just replace "VM" with something else. > > About RoarVM. > I think the main reason why RoarVM does not exists for Pharo is > because there was no discussion and planning beforehead, how we could > cooperate. > Where the discussion, how we could introduce new execution models, and > gradually (means step by step) migrate to new VM?
+1 > > Take into account there there is virtually no knowledge outside of > your team, what has to be changed in order to make Pharo run on > RoarVM. > So what did you expected? That people drop everything which already > works well for them and hastily migrate to new platform? > > How about CogVM? Should we stop developing it? Or we should start > supporting both? And can we do that without too much pain? Give us the > idea. > > I, personally all for having VM which knows how to exploit > multicore/manycore systems. But at what costs? +1 > At cost of throwing away everything and implementing new VM and new > smalltalk from scratch? I can do that myself. But then i wouldn't come > to pharo list to say > that i don't give a shit about pharo. > Because if i would like Pharo to use my stuff, i will stay with people > and help, and try to figure out how we can manage to leverage new > technology without jumping too high > with the risk to break the legs. +1 > > It makes no point saying here that you don't give a shit about Pharo. > If you don't, why pharoers should? > > I appreciate the engineering effort what you have did. But its a top > of the iceberg. Migrating existing system to another platform is very > complex task, > and given that day has 24 hours in it.. figure the answer :)
