On Sat, Nov 13, 1999 at 10:13:49PM -0600, Carlos Antonio Perez wrote:
> 
> 	Is anybody working on a distributed version of Squeak?

There were some experiments/prototyps for distributed objects in Squeak:


Lex Spoon  Link:          http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~lex/7431/index.html
           Archived Mail: http://www.egroups.com/group/squeak/4412.html?

  Anyway, I did a basic RMI system for Squeak as a class project last quarter. 
  Ihadn't mentioned it because, well, it's just a toy.  But maybe a toy is at
  least interesting to some people out there.  
                                     

Xu Wang    http://www.egroups.com/group/squeak/7259.html?  

  S2S is a small object request broker designed specifically for
  Squeak. It let distributed objects send messages to each other 
  easily and transparently.


Peter Smet:  FlyByWire - a mini ORB for Squeak  
   http://www.egroups.com/group/squeak/4068.html?
   http://www.egroups.com/group/squeak/4106.html?   
 
> 	How about Actors (actalk) as proposed by Jean-Pierre Briot? 
> 

ftp://camille.is.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/pub/members/briot/actalk/actalk.html

There is (as far as I know) no port of actalk for Squeak. But Stephen Pair
did an experimental Asynchronous Message implementation:


Stephen Pair: Asynchronous Messaging 
              http://www.advantive.com/squeak
              http://www.egroups.com/group/squeak/3961.html?


> 	What happened to the multithreaded squeak (Jitter if I remember)?

Jitter isn't multithreaded. It's a kind of JIT-Compiler that uses a
technique calles "threaded code", but this has (as I understood it) nothing
to do with the "threads" that operating systems provide.

  Marcus

-- 
Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de phone at home:(0721)614235 @work:(0721)608-2749
"Smalltalk is dangerous. It is a drug. My advice to you would be don't try
 it; it could ruin your life." -- Andy Bower