>agree at carltonfields.com wrote:
> > Why not simply implement this functionality in Smalltalk or Slang?
>
>Please excuse my ignorance on this subject, but isn't this exactly what the
>various classes in the System-compression catagory do?
>
>-- Jecel

That was my point.  I understand that present implementations do not 
handle multiple files and the like, but why not simply add that 
functionality to the compression routines?

I think the first question we need to ask ourselves before extending 
the Squeak VM, is whether it makes sense to do it at all.  Extending 
Squeak with "outside" code can introduce system frailty, machine 
dependency and external licensing conflicts.  One of the 
extraordinary features of Squeak is its delivery of the elusive 
"write once/run anywhere" chimera -- it does what Java never 
delivered.  Plugins, indeed any machine-dependent feature, threaten 
Squeak's capacity to do that and seduce us to take some easier paths 
from time to time in the name of "getting it done now."

Mind you, I live in a glass house, practicing the same vice -- I did 
precisely the same thing with the rePlugin.  (And reimplementing the 
rePlugin in Slang is certainly on my to-do list!)

Of course there are times when it can and does make sense to extend 
the VM.  I just didn't see that here.