On 19.11.2012, at 21:48, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 19 November 2012 17:45, Max Leske <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 19.11.2012, at 21:37, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Okay, after i saw C code in limbo.c >>> i can clearly tell, that read_buffers() function can be implemented >>> purely on smalltalk using nativeboost. >>> >>> as for run_command() function, you should try to also implement it as >>> a series of system calls using nativeboost ffi. >>> it is possible. >>> >>> The most issues would be is to account for scheduler to make sure that >>> no-one can interrupt the process between critical parts of code (like >>> VM scheduler). >> >> :-/ sounds tricky… >> > nope. this part is actually easy: > > [ something which should not interrupt] forkAt: Processor highestPriority.
Sweet. I'll give it a try. > >>> >>> You should really consider avoiding having C code at all.. because at >>> the end it doesn't makes things any simpler comparing to having extra >>> VM plugin (and knowing how to deal with it - compile/copy/distribute >>> with VM) for users. >>> >> >> Good to know! >> Now that I have a working version in C I think that it should be a lot >> easier to write the equivalent NativeBoost code since I know what actually >> to code :) > > Indeed. :) > >> It's also pretty easy to just replace the call to the library with the NB >> code in Limbo, so any code using the library will keep on working. >> >> Anybody willing to write this in NativeBoost is more than welcome, I'll have >> to stop working on it for the moment. >> >>> But anyways, good to see there's brave people who don't fear to swim >>> in those waters :) >>> >> >> Thanks :) >> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko. >>> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. >
