[SqueakEnd] and modules

Stephen Pair spair at advantive.com
Fri Apr 5 15:57:47 UTC 2002

That sounds like a good idea.  I think it'll be a good way for a few of
us to learn the module system.  So the question is, what is a good chunk
of squeak that needs to be made un-loadable?  You mentioned
Balloon...any others?

- Stephen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org 
> [mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On 
> Behalf Of Doug Way
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 12:37 AM
> To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [SqueakEnd] and modules
> Stephen Pair wrote:
> > Since Dan is tentatively scheduled to give a presentation 
> on modules 
> > at the SqueakEnd/MMWorkshop, I thought it would be a good 
> idea to have 
> > a project oriented around that.  I've only been following 
> modules off 
> > and on for the last 5 or 6 months and don't really know what issues 
> > are critical at the moment.
> > 
> > Can anyone comment on the current state of modularity and what they 
> > think might make for a good module oriented project at SqueakEnd?
> I agree that a module-related project might be a good one for the 
> SqueakEnd, since a bunch of core Squeak folks will be there.
> I wonder if it might be appropriate to try to work on 
> converting another 
> chunk or two of Squeak to be cleanly unloadable?  (I thought 
> I'd heard 
> that unloading works, and that there are a couple parts of the system 
> that are unloadable right now, something like Balloon.  Is 
> this true?  I 
> haven't poked around with trying to unload anything yet.)
> - Doug Way
>    dway at riskmetrics.com

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list