[Modules]
Bijan Parsia
bparsia at email.unc.edu
Fri Aug 17 02:06:08 UTC 2001
--On Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:45 PM -0400 Dave <dave at bedarra.com> wrote:
> No one is advocating that the image disappear,
Which seems to suggest that *I* was suggesting that someone is so
advocating, but:
>> I'm fairly
>> sure all involved are with me, but I feel inclined to make noise about
>> this.
[snip]
> nor that you should be
> prevented from working the way you want to today if you wish. We all
> appreciate flexibilty and performance of the image.
[snip]
But it's easy to get carried away when working on "the other side".
Such appriciation hasn't prevented other Smalltalks from producing what is,
for me, kinda yucky solutions. Of course, the lack of my advocacy hasn't
prevented other Smalltalks from achieving really cool ones :)
But here is my advocacy, nevertheless :)
And as a side reply to Allen: While I mostly mentioned the virtues of the
monolithic image in terms of deployment, is it *limited* to deployment? It
seems deployment issues (e.g., building vs. stripping) are one modularity
issue among many. Perhaps one trickiness about the image is that it spurts
over several potentially separate modularity issues...
...and thus I'm led into the "modularize the modularity" camp :)
Cheers,
Bijan Parsia.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|