Craig Latta wrote:
> Hi Peter--
> 
>>Has any progress on squeak's interface to BSD sockets been made? Was
>>anyone taking this on?
> 
> 	I'm not aware of any new socket features being added since you last
> asked. I think the Flow framework ( http://netjam.org/flow ) is the best
> starting point for this work, since it has had a BSD orientation toward
> sockets from the beginning (and this is reflected in a more
> straightforward primitive interface).

 From browsing it looks like Flow is still Alpha. Has it been tried in a 
3.7 image?

I read your comparison between Flow and Squeak's sockets. Its an older 
article. Is it still accurate concerning Squeak's socket rewrite?

Spelunking in Squeak's Socket code leaves me scratching my head.
We have Socket, OldSocket, SocketStreams, OldSimpleClientSocket...
I know two of those are sub-classes.

I might misunderstand what I see, I am far from knowledgeable. But it 
seems like Squeak's socket situation could use some consolidation.

And where does Flow fit into the above?
How well does Flow perform?
Would web apps be improved with Flow?
How hard to migrate to Flow?

Just some naive questions.

Thanks.

Jimmie Houchin