Proposal: Squeak-E = Squeak x Kernel-E

cg at cg at
Sun Jan 26 20:09:36 UTC 2003

Lex Spoon <squeak-dev at> said:
>What E is definitely helpful with, is image-level *design* ideas. 

Hear, hear. 

I think your analysis is correct. I've been thinking about doing this as
part of the modular Squeak thingy that should start this year - strip
Squeak to the bare bones (I call it 'Kernel Squeak'), and secure it.

You'll have an absolutely lousy environment (probably the VM and some
base classes - Object, Collection, Class, ...), but you can declare it
secure (extra SqueakMap flag?). 

Then, load the lot and ship it (the environment I call 'Core Squeak',
with development environment, readme, Morphic, whatever). Now, package
by package, pick it apart, audit it, lock it down, and declare it
secure. Continue until Core Squeak consists wholly of packages declared

Whether you need/want the E VM for this, I don't know. I'm not deep
enough into capabilities to know whether the E VM (or Kernel E) would
make a difference here, but my gut feeling is that it doesn't. One of
the best things of the Squeak VM is that it exists :-), so ceteris 
paribus we should stick with what we know and love.

(my personal interest here is Kernel Squeak plus a bit so you can have
an embeddable VM that you can plug into any environment to do funky
networking stuff)
Cees de Groot          <cg at>
GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD  1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B
Cogito ergo evigilo

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list