<div dir="ltr">Hi Bert, Hi All,<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:55 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:commits@source.squeak.org" target="_blank">commits@source.squeak.org</a>></span> wrote:</div><div class="gmail_quote">[snip]<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><a href="http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/packages/2016-September/068930.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.squeakfoundation.<wbr>org/pipermail/packages/2016-<wbr>September/068930.html</a><br>
<br>
Name: System-bf.916<br>
Ancestors: System-bf.915<br>
<br>
Replace VM-level ImageSegment loading with a Smalltalk implementation for old (interpreter-era) projects.<br>
<br>
Also removes support for writing segments.<br>
<br>
This overrides the Spur support introduced in System-eem.758.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div> So one question is should we delete VM support for ImageSegment from the Spur VM? There's at least 1.5k of generated source for the Spur ImageSegment load and save support, some 2% of the interpreter/primitives source code. That's a lot, and the code is complex and ugly. If it never really worked before IMO we should nuke it asap. If it worked in some fashion perhaps we can schedule its demise for the 6.0 release's VM.</div><div><br></div><div>What do others think?</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><span style="font-size:small;border-collapse:separate"><div>_,,,^..^,,,_<br></div><div>best, Eliot</div></span></div></div></div>
</div></div>