Hi,

When making up new Imageversion Numbers make also sure you don't use by
accaident a byte-swapped version of an existing image-version number.
The 
mechanism (at least in the interpreter-simulator) relies on the absence
of such coincidences.

Just my 2P
Torge
Craig Latta wrote:
> 
> > Oh, and we'll need to think of a new image version number - '6502'
> > (or '1969') has been used since the beginning and needs replacing to
> > avoid the older vms getting upset. How about:-
> > 8086 (yuck)
> > 1972
> > err...
> 
>         I'd like 4 (suitably padded), to indicate that this is the fourth image
> format, or 2002, to indicate the year of introduction (assuming this
> sort of thing won't happen more than once a year... hee hee).
> 
> -C
> 
> --
> Craig Latta
> improvisational musical informaticist
> craig at netjam.org
> www.netjam.org
> Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]