MC in basic
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Mon Dec 13 22:39:34 UTC 2004
On 13 déc. 04, at 23:14, Lyndon Tremblay wrote:
> For issues with "image size" or "code quantity" in including MC - why
> just load MC into an image, install/uninstall desired/undesired
> then unload it when finished? A->B->C...
yes this is what I was thinking :)
But I have to check with marcus because he is smart and I trust him
when he tells
that something is getting in his way. So once I will have clarified
that point with him
I will make that clear to the rest :)
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "stéphane ducasse" <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch>
> To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list"
> <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>; <avi at beta4.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 1:40 PM
> Subject: Re: MC in basic
>>> Yes, that's exactly right. And by the same logic, I would now have
>>> problem having VMMaker etc in basic either, since they are now (post
>>> 3.5) well packaged too - as I said, I don't *care* what's in basic
>>> what isn't as long as I can trivially unload some of it. Or what's
>>> not in it, since I can trivially load what I need.
>> For traits we would like to use OB because the old browser is hell.
>> And managing the new compiler as a package would be much easier for
>> This has also the nice effect that we could even produce an image
>> without the compiler.
>> Cool ;) but this is for mini-image people.
>> So we would like to have MC to be able for us to go fast.
More information about the Squeak-dev