[SqueakEnd] and modules
Stephen Pair
spair at advantive.com
Fri Apr 5 15:57:47 UTC 2002
That sounds like a good idea. I think it'll be a good way for a few of
us to learn the module system. So the question is, what is a good chunk
of squeak that needs to be made un-loadable? You mentioned
Balloon...any others?
- Stephen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> [mailto:squeak-dev-admin at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On
> Behalf Of Doug Way
> Sent: Saturday, March 30, 2002 12:37 AM
> To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [SqueakEnd] and modules
>
>
>
> Stephen Pair wrote:
>
> > Since Dan is tentatively scheduled to give a presentation
> on modules
> > at the SqueakEnd/MMWorkshop, I thought it would be a good
> idea to have
> > a project oriented around that. I've only been following
> modules off
> > and on for the last 5 or 6 months and don't really know what issues
> > are critical at the moment.
> >
> > Can anyone comment on the current state of modularity and what they
> > think might make for a good module oriented project at SqueakEnd?
>
>
> I agree that a module-related project might be a good one for the
> SqueakEnd, since a bunch of core Squeak folks will be there.
>
> I wonder if it might be appropriate to try to work on
> converting another
> chunk or two of Squeak to be cleanly unloadable? (I thought
> I'd heard
> that unloading works, and that there are a couple parts of the system
> that are unloadable right now, something like Balloon. Is
> this true? I
> haven't poked around with trying to unload anything yet.)
>
> - Doug Way
> dway at riskmetrics.com
>
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|