Hi Bert, Hi David,

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:57 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
wrote:

> On 12 April 2018 at 22:45, John McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Actually it is a 64bit compiled application that works with 32bit images,
>> there was also a 64bit application that works with 64bit images. However
>> was Eliot points out the format of a 64bit image is different because it
>> has other immediate types, and different context structures. The original
>> 64bit image type didn't have any of those changes.
>>
>
+1

​The Spur image, yes.
>
> But we're only talking about running a 32 bit image on a 64 bit VM. Here's
> a refresher on the terminology:
>
> http://squeakvm.org/squeak64/faq.html​
>

So am I being a prima donna by finding this page misleading?  It's
referring to a system that few if any people use.  It doesn't mention that
we have a 64-bit system that is much faster, has a full FFI, etc.
Shouldn't this page at least say that there is a more modern 64-bit system
along with a URL, and state that this VM is effectively obsolete?  Does
this come over like me trying to kill the old VM?  I wish people would be
frank about their feelings (if any) here rather than keeping silent.  I
don't want to offend, but I do want to provide high-performance functional
systems with the person power we have available, and provide good
information to the new user.  I do feel frustrated when I see the old
64-bit system still described as if it's current.  I wonder if people feel
as strongly for the old 64-bit system.



> - Bert -
>
>
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12 April 2018 at 16:31, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> On 12.04.2018, at 16:05, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Bert,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Apr 12, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If that's indeed the case we need to make a 64 bit VM for 32 bit
>>>> images. I think this should be just a matter of picking the right compiler
>>>> options.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How so?  AFAIA it is not.  It means, for example, changing every memory
>>>> access for an instance variable from 64 to 32 bits.  It is non-trivial.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But wasn't that done once already?
>>>>
>>>> I see Squeak 5.7.4.1 (John Macintosh did it I think).
>>>> Wich advertises itself as
>>>>
>>>> and worked very well. Not saying every bits are there for the present
>>>> (spur etc)
>>>> but at least, we have been there already at least once…
>>>>
>>>
>>> ​Yep. Its just the 32 bit VM compiled on a 64 bit host. This worked
>>> without big problems on the interpreter. I don't know what additional
>>> constraints are imposed by Cog / Spur, but I thought at least for intel,
>>> the 32 bit instruction set was a strict subset of x64, so there should be
>>> no big problems.
>>>
>>> - Bert -​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ============================================================
>> ===============
>> John M. McIntosh. Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/smalltalk
>> ============================================================
>> ===============
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>


-- 
_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20180412/1829be68/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Bildschirmfoto 2018-04-12 um 16.30.25.PNG
Type: image/png
Size: 14003 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20180412/1829be68/attachment.png>