<div dir="ltr">Hi all, <div><br><div>question inlined...<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Eliot Miranda <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:eliot.miranda@gmail.com" target="_blank">eliot.miranda@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <br><div dir="auto"><div>Hi Bert,<br><br></div><div><br>On Apr 12, 2018, at 6:03 AM, Bert Freudenberg <<a href="mailto:bert@freudenbergs.de" target="_blank">bert@freudenbergs.de</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000">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.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>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.<div><br></div><div>What /is/ trivial is detecting that an image's word size is unsupported on a platform and offering to convert it, a process that takes less than a minute for typical images.</div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div>Why does this process take a full minute ? Could we do that in 1 second ? Is it only because of SmallFloat ?</div><div><br></div><div>I mean I could dream of a world where 64-bits image under 2Gb are saved as 32 bits images to be more compact on disk. Then at start-up, the 32 bits image is converted into a 64 bits image if started on a 64 bits VM, or not if started on a 32 bits VM. We could also save image under 65k as 16 bits images, and convert them back as start-up :-). Obviously that would work only if the conversion is fast, but I think it could be with tricks to handle SmallFloats.</div><div><br></div><div>Note that the code optimized by Sista is currently dependent on word size though due to overflow computation, but I guess we'll solve this problem later.</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div><br></div><div>If we go this route we would include a headless 64-bit image that converts 32-bit images to 64-bits on 64-bit only systems, and <span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">a headless 32-bit image that converts 64-bit images to 32-bits on 32-bit only systems.</span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">IIRC 64 to 32 bit conversion needs to be written, but I think it is trivial compared to building a 64-bit vm for 32-bit images.</span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)"><br></span></div><div><span style="background-color:rgba(255,255,255,0)">Of course this applies only to Spur images. We don't have a way of automatically converting V3 images to Spur. Yo do that going forward we may have to depend on OS virtual machines, but somehow I can't see an ARMv8 Mac supporting x86 VMs like Parallels. This could be the end of an interoperability era.</span></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000">Otherwise we won't have any way of opening regular 32 bit images on Macs.</div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000"><br></div><div style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:small;color:#000000">- Bert -</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 12 April 2018 at 14:47, Fabio Niephaus <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lists@fniephaus.com" target="_blank">lists@fniephaus.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="m_5190493073784700490m_3464897733717783518inboxEmptyGmelius"></div><div>Hi all,</div><div><br></div><div>According to [1], Apple has started to alert users when they open a 32-bit app on the Mac and I've seen such a dialog today myself when opening a 32-bit Squeak image.</div><div><br></div><div>It looks like it is time to make 64-bit the default, maybe with the next release? The Pharo community is already doing that for quite some time, so I'm wondering if there is any reason not to do the same?</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Fabio</div><div><br></div>[1] <a href="https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/11/apple-starting-to-alert-users-that-it-will-end-32-bit-app-support/" target="_blank">https://techcrunch.com/2018/04<wbr>/11/apple-starting-to-alert-us<wbr>ers-that-it-will-end-32-bit-ap<wbr>p-support/</a></div>
<br><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span></span><br></div></blockquote></div></div><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Clément Béra<br></span><span style="color:rgb(0,0,238)"><a href="https://clementbera.github.io/" target="_blank">https://clementbera.github.io/</a></span><div style="font-size:12.8px"><a href="https://clementbera.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">https://clementbera.wordpress.com/</a></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div></div></div>