> Yeah, but I was talking about hosting java class files in the squeak vm.

Smalltalk/X do that...
It can also make an applet as a front end for an application...

More info on: http://www.exept.de/sites/exept/english/Home/frame_welcome.html

-- Alexandre

> On Tuesday, November 12, 2002, at 05:21  PM, athiele at charter.net wrote:
> 
> >I hate to stiffle creativity, but Java in my opinion is bloated, 
> >slow,and
> >poorly designed. I have used Java for years, and have grown to hate it
> >more and more. Squeak on the JVM would be a Huge performance hit.
> >Look at Jython vs. Python. Above remember who dictates Java (tm) 
> >policy.
> >
> >Adrian
> >
> >From: tblanchard at mac.com
> >Date: Tue Nov 12, 2002  5:15:42  PM Europe/Paris
> >To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >Subject: Re: Porting Squeak to Java VM
> >Reply-To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >
> >
> >
> >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.
> >
> >
> >
> 

-- 
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._
Bergel Alexandre  http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~bergel
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^