Hi Dave,

Oh, I assumed that there had been no 64-bit version of 3.10 VM
and also that 32-bit virtual images could not run on 64-bit VMs.

Or, does it means that by building from source on current Unix-like system,
former VM for 32-bit VI can also be generated as 64-bit executables?

Anyway, I'll try to build a 3.10 VM on the latest macOS by following your
instruction.

Thank you.

--
sumim

2020-10-04 David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>:

> On Sun, Oct 04, 2020 at 12:07:47PM +0900, sumi masato wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > Great!
> >
> > Could you build a Docker image and publish it for macOS users
> > who are restricted 32 bit VM by Apple also to try it easily?
> >
> > --
> > sumim
>
> I have no experience with Docker, but if you or someone else
> knows how to do that, I'll be happy help if you run into any
> difficulty compiling the VM.
>
> I do not understand "restricted 32 bit VM by Apple" but to
> clarify, the Linux VM I use is a 64 bit VM running the 32-bit
> Squeak image. I expect this is what you would want to use if
> you were building a Docker image, although you can also compile
> the VM as a 32 bit application if needed. But I saw no problems
> running Trygve's image on the 64 bit VM.
>
> Dave
>
>
> >
> > 2020-10-04 David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>:
> >
> > > Thank you Trygve,
> > >
> > > I confirm also that the image runs very well on my Ubuntu Linux laptop
> > > with a VM compiled per http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6354.
> > >
> > > Dave
> > >
> > > On Sat, Oct 03, 2020 at 07:56:43PM +0900, masato sumi wrote:
> > > > Dear Trygve,
> > > >
> > > > I confirmed that I could launch the Loke/BabyIDE image with the
> included
> > > > SqueakVM for Windows (8.1 and 10)
> > > > and I could also launch it in a web browser by using the SqueakJS VM
> (
> > > > https://squeak.js.org/run ).
> > > >
> > > > Thank you very much.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > sumim
> > > >
> > > > 2020-10-03 15:48 Trygve Reenskaug <trygver at ifi.uio.no>:
> > > >
> > > > > Dear Sumim,
> > > > > Thank you for your kind words.
> > > > >
> > > > > The latest version of Loke/BabyIDE written on Squeak3.10.2 is at
> > > > > https://data.mendeley.com/datasets/5xxgzv7fsp/1
> > > > > The image is my program repository. It includes some examples of
> DCI
> > > > > programming, Ellen's Personal Programming IDE, Squeak Reverse
> > > Engineering
> > > > > (SRE), and more.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best
> > > > > --Trygve
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2020-10-02 20:14, masato sumi wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Trygve,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you for your very long term contribution and efforts.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm very sorry that I couldn't help you at all now.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm afraid, but could you please make your latest version of
> > > Loke/BabyIDE
> > > > > written on Squeak3.10.2 available for future generations of
> researchers
> > > > > and/or followers?
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, I think your ideas and thoughts should be passed on to
> future
> > > > > generations as faithfully as we can possible, and I myself will
> try to
> > > make
> > > > > sure that.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you so much and goodbye.
> > > > > Please take care of yourself.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > sumim
> > > > >
> > > > > 2020-10-03 0:54 Trygve Reenskaug <trygver at ifi.uio.no>:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Dear all,
> > > > >> I need to use many words to explore why I can't understand current
> > > Squeak
> > > > >> code. I believe the reason is a profound one, and I hope some of
> you
> > > have
> > > > >> the patience to read about it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thank you for your responses to my 'A Sad Day'-message. One
> response
> > > said
> > > > >>  "*But please don't give up as an inventor of MVC, which has
> > > simplified
> > > > >> writing software for all of us.*
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> *We need new ideas to stabilize Smalltalk." *As to MVC, it was
> > > received
> > > > >> with acclamation when I first presented it at PARC in 1978, and
> people
> > > > >> suggested I should make it the theme of my article in the special
> > > Smalltalk
> > > > >> issue of Byte. I couldn't understand it; MVC was so simple and
> > > obvious that
> > > > >> is was not worth writing about it. Nevertheless, people seem to
> have
> > > > >> problems understanding MVC. It took me a long time before I
> gleaned
> > > what
> > > > >> was going on. The explanation is a deep one, rooted in our
> different
> > > mental
> > > > >> paradigms.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> From around 1970, I was working on Prokon, a distributed system
> for
> > > > >> managers in the shipbuilding industry:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  Every manager has their own computer that they use for augmenting
> > > their
> > > > >> mind. The manager understands their software and ideally writes it
> > > > >> themselves. Managers delegate conversations with other managers to
> > > their
> > > > >> computer's M-to-M network. (Marked with a heavy black line in the
> > > figure).
> > > > >> I chose "distributed planning with central control" as my example
> > > project.
> > > > >> Each manager creates a plan for their department, using apps
> suited to
> > > > >> their particular needs. A **distributed algorithm** ensures
> > > consistency
> > > > >> across departments.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I came to PARC in 1978 and could immediately relate to the
> Smalltalk
> > > > >> image with its universe of collaborating objects. Alan's
> definition of
> > > > >> object-orientation fitted my Prokon model: "Thus its semantics
> are a
> > > bit
> > > > >> like having thousands and thousands of computers all hooked
> together
> > > by a
> > > > >> very fast network."
> > > > >>
> > > > >> MVC prescribes a network of communicating objects. Any object can
> fill
> > > > >> one or more positions in the network as long as it has the
> required
> > > > >> behavior; their classes are irrelevant. It's so simple that it's
> not
> > > worth
> > > > >> writing about it.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ====================
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The work on this post was interrupted at this point by an
> unexpected
> > > week
> > > > >> in hospital. It gave me quiet days of pondering the futility of
> what
> > > I am
> > > > >> doing and I will be terminating my memberships in the Pharo and
> Squeak
> > > > >> mailing lists. I have also deleted most of the old draft of this
> > > message
> > > > >> and will quickly conclude with two observations:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>    1.
> > > > >>    The Smalltalk image is a universe of communicating objects. I
> call
> > > it
> > > > >>    an object computer. It can be seen as the model of an entirely
> new
> > > kind of
> > > > >>    computer, a model on a level closer to the human mind than the
> von
> > > Neumann
> > > > >>    model of 1948. The new model is communication-centric and
> should
> > > supersede
> > > > >>    the ubiquitous CPU-centric model as soon as possible. Working
> out
> > > the
> > > > >>    details of this idea could make an exciting and disruptive
> Ph.D.
> > > thesis.
> > > > >>    2.
> > > > >>    Smalltalk is called a programming language. It is a curious
> one,
> > > very
> > > > >>    different from well-known languages like Java with their
> syntax and
> > > > >>    semantics. Smalltalk, as a programming language, does not have
> the
> > > concept
> > > > >>    of a program. Smalltalk, as a class-oriented language, does not
> > > have syntax
> > > > >>    for the declaration of a class. Smalltalk, as an
> object-oriented
> > > language,
> > > > >>    can't describe how objects collaborate to achieve a goal. You
> > > appear to be
> > > > >>    happy with this state of affairs, at least, I see no sign of
> > > anybody
> > > > >>    wanting to move on from the unfinished Smalltalk language to a
> > > mature
> > > > >>    development environment. I do not find it satisfactory and it
> is
> > > not
> > > > >>    acceptable to the intended managers populating the distributed
> > > system shown
> > > > >>    in the first picture. Consequently, I have done something
> about it
> > > as
> > > > >>    described in my SoSym article "*Personal Programming and the
> Object
> > > > >>    Computer.*" I am tired of being alone in my endeavors and this
> ends
> > > > >>    my work with Squeak and other Smalltalks. I wish you health and
> > > happiness
> > > > >>    wherever you happen to be.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Trygve
> > > > >> Personal programming and the object computer
> > > > >> https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-019-00768-3
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >>
> > > > >> *The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate  to
> > > > >> achieve a goal. *
> > > > >> Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no <%
> > > 20trygver at ifi.uio.no>
> > > > >> Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> > > > >> N-0378 Oslo             http://fullOO.info
> > > > >> Norway                     Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > > *The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate  to
> > > achieve
> > > > > a goal. *
> > > > > Trygve Reenskaug      mailto: trygver at ifi.uio.no <%
> > > 20trygver at ifi.uio.no>
> > > > > Morgedalsvn. 5A       http://folk.uio.no/trygver/
> > > > > N-0378 Oslo             http://fullOO.info
> > > > > Norway                     Tel: (+47) 468 58 625
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > sent from mobile
>
> >
>
>
>

-- 
sent from mobile
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20201005/011070b8/attachment.html>