> Andrew, David (thank you for the hint with the compile times) > and Dean have
> favorized Plugins as implementation choice (for different reasons).
> > I think this is a possible variant which makes sense, too. > But also I think
> that's not the main point:
> - it should be possible for a non C-freak just by reading sources in
> Smalltalk to get a working idea how its possible to make LargeInteger
> computations in Smalltalk
> 	=> this is the didactic approach;

Plugins, as various people have proposed, would be written in Smalltalk, in Squeak.

> - its interesting to have LargeInt arithmetics __as fast as possible__
> without the coercion to follow the 'didactic' implementation line
> 	=> cryptographic, maths, random generators, advertising > (for people who
> compare Squeak with other Smalltalks);

Plugins should have no meaningful overhead, particularly if implemented as byteArrays.

> - then it should be as portable as possible, so don't try > near assembler
> programming.

Again, plugins should be highly portable.  Frankly, I don't understand Stephan's objections on any of these points.

> Some personal remarks:
> I want to start this around mid of November (then I have some > holidays, now
> I'm working for money and writing these mails ;-)). But after > start I have
> to
> - compile Squeak first;

Why?

> - understand the plugin mechanism with a simple example, not > 'primitive' ;-)
> example, what I first have written;

Examples can be found in the image.  There is also some doco on the Swiki.