Thank you very much for your expert advice. Can you elaborate a bit why a
Squeak.dll is so different from Squeak.exe? What holds back the browser
plugin from becoming a CAD plugin/addon?

Thanks,
Aik-Siong Koh



I think it would be MUCH easier to write a .dll which communicating
with squeak vm using sockets instead of rewriting squeak VM to be
compiled as dll.
There are too much gory details need to be changed to be able to build
squeak as dynamic library for general purpose.
Squeak VM can be built as browser plugin (dll), but to what i saw it
is really different to making squeak a simple dynamic library.


-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Squeak-as-DLL-tp18655393p18671688.html
Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.