Regarding the one binary distribution (so that people do not have to move the frameworks around): are 'bundles' a solution ? I thought they could be used to package an application with its frameworks as (seemingly) one application ? That way the VM and its frameworks could be bndled as one application, while retaining the frameworks itself, I think.
On 02/07/01 14:34, "Marcel Weiher" marcel@metaobject.com wrote:
On Saturday, June 30, 2001, at 05:54 Uhr, doug way wrote:
Both Squeak.framework and SqueakAppKit.framework.
Sorry, this was my problem... not sure how I missed this. Once I moved SqueakAppKit.framework over, double-clicking the VM worked, and I could open the .image file from within CocoaSqueak.
Great!
The feel of CocoaSqueak is slower than running Squeak in the classic environment, but the benchmarks are about the same between the two, so I guess the display updating or events must be a bit slower at this point?
Yes, so far to both, it seems. Which CocoaSqueak version are you using? The most recent version (3.03) made some advances in terms of display speed, at least in 16 bit mode. The Squeak event system still doesn't deal all that well with being a passive client of OS events.
Otherwise, it seemed to work pretty well... I didn't run into any
crashes (except for the known quit-from-world-menu problem).
I should really address that ASAP...
Regards,
Marcle