On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 9:04 AM, Michael van der Gulik
<mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:
> Replying to an email from Frank that I realised the list would be
> interested in too:
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 10:18 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 17 April 2012 03:44, Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 10:45 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip - SecureSqueak description>
>
>>> What do you want to use it for?
>>
>> I've been doing a ton of reading on modules, in Newspeak and ML
>> mainly. There's been a bunch of talk recently in both the Squeak and
>> Pharo communities on reviving modularisation efforts.
>>
>> Mainly, I want to see if your work on packages can enable something
>> like Newspeak and ML, where you may have multiple versions of the same
>> package loaded in the same image, where packages don't have full
>> access to other package's bits (unless you explicitly enable said
>> access). In essence I'd like to carve up the flat, known-by-everything
>> global-state-ish namespace we currently have.
>
> That's a fairly accurate description of what I did, although I'm
> unfamiliar with Newspeak and ML. I have done the following, all of it
> less than alpha-quality code. All of this is code in their own
> Namespaces and they don't appear in the SystemDictionary:

<snip>

Oh yea, I haven't implemented any form of public/protected/private
classes or namespaces. That's pretty easy to do if you have some idea
of what you want.

More info is here:
http://gulik.pbworks.com/SecureSqueak
which is a part of:
http://gulik.pbworks.com/Unnamed%20Grand%20Project

Michael.

-- 
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/