Technology of the technologies (WAS: A Lisper asks, "Am I supposed to like Smalltalk?")

goran at goran at
Thu May 18 08:55:58 UTC 2006


Hans-Martin Mosner <hmm at> wrote:
> tim Rowledge wrote:
> > Compiling straight to machine code is certainly doable; it simply  
> > involves a lot more work since you have to develop and optimise and  
> > debug a *lot* more stuff. For example, you'd have to rewrite the  
> > compiler, the debugger, the InstructionStream related classes and  
> > tools, any system that expects to write out methods, etc etc. Send  
> > enough money and I will arrange it for you. Discussions could start  
> > at, ooh, One *Million* Euros.
> Doable, but not really a good way to implement Smalltalk.

And so what do you guys think of Exupery? I had the distinct impression
that Exupery is exactly this (a sophisticated machine code compiler for
Smalltalk) - and as long as Exupery can mop the floor with the regular
VM performance wise - then why would it be "not really a good way"?

If the reader don't know what Exupery is then look at the movie or read
the handout:

regards, Göran

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list