[Vm-dev] preferred methodology for handling Pharo'isms on Squeak?

[Eliot Miranda]

Hi Tty,


On Sat, May 10, 2014 at 8:17 AM, gettimothy <gettimothy at zoho.com> wrote:

>
> Hi All.
>
> Is there a preferred methodology for handling Pharo-isms on Squeak?
>
> I know Seaside has Grease which does some of that, but I don't thing we
> want Grease for CMakeVMMaker (or do we).
>
> Specifically, the Pharo team has abstracted out some stuff in
> SmalltalkImage (vm, platform..) that does not exist in Squeak.
>
>
> If there is an existing mechanism for bridging this gap, I will use it.
>
> In the meantime, I will be DTSTTCW.
>

+1.  But I recommend a compatibility package that is loaded alongside to
provide the missing support in Squeak.  Then methods (& classes) can be
moved from there into Squeak when we see fit.



>
>
> cordially,
>
> tty
>
>
>


-- 
best,
Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20140510/665a18f9/attachment.htm