Derek Brans <brans at nerdonawire.com> wrote:
> Any thought been given to this?
> Would that give us "Squeak in a web-browser" without a plug-in, among
> other things?

Boring.  Also, not a particularly good fit.

What might be more entertaining is to write a java class loader in 
squeak that loaded a java class definition (bytecodes) and translated 
it into an equivalent Squeak class (loading and translating all 
dependent classes as well).  There's an awful lot of java code being 
written - some of it might be worth leveraging.

Most of it probably isn't.

Just my opinion.