[experimental][BCS][VM] Yet another block closure semantics implementation

ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Wed Feb 20 08:26:05 UTC 2002


hi Stefan 

Have you look on how what you learned could be included in the work of
Anthony's because I do not really see the point to have now two
implementation of BC. Because even if the approach of Antony is more complex
it works so what would be the point to have a simple version. Especially
after the long emails sent by allen wirfs-brock on how to integrate BC.

However when I see the speed gain with the version of Antony I know that I
would really like to use it.



> Dear Squeakers,
> 
> I have finished my - very personal - BCS implementation, see
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/1810
> for a description and instructions to get it running.
> 
> It
> - differs a lot from Anthony's approach,
> - is not so ambitious conceptually, and
> - is slower,
> but in spite of this there are areas, where using it could make sense:
> - step by step migration to full BCS semantics,
> - running both semantics in parallel.
> 
> It is compatible with Squeak3.2gamma as with Squeak3.3alpha (just tested).
> 
> The hard semantic tests (thanks to Boris Gaertner and Rob Withers!) I know
> are all running OK; if you should detect errors in the semantics, please
> cry!
> 
> There is left - probably much - room for optimizations (and bug fixes ;-) ).
> 
> If there is some interest I could update the outdated
> Draft for Block Closure Semantics for Squeak
> to match the released implementation (but give me some time then, I have to
> work in my money making job...).
> 
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> Stephan




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list