3.9 vs. 3.10 : Closures, fixTemps

Mathieu Suen mathk.sue at gmail.com
Wed Dec 19 20:16:48 UTC 2007


Well so propose us your solution.
At least the new compiler exist .

On Dec 19, 2007, at 6:12 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> Philippe Marschall wrote:
>>> there is really no reason whatsoever why a working closure solution
>>> couldn't be adopted to the current compiler (which would mitigate  
>>> the
>>> risk factors of adoption dramatically).
>> They why was the closure solution of the new compiler rejected?
>
> "The closure solution rejected"? Not that I know of. I haven't even  
> seen a thorough discussion about its merits (which should include  
> benchmarks etc) - what I did see was some talk that led me to  
> believe that there is still a ways to go here. To the best of my  
> knowledge this solution isn't "final" by any means.
>
> Or do you mean the compiler itself? In which case all I can say it's  
> hard to recommend a compiler which can't even recompile Object ;-)
>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>

	Mth






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list