[Vm-dev] Re: [squeak-dev] Crypto Plugins on Cog

Eliot Miranda eliot.miranda at gmail.com
Tue Sep 7 16:15:48 UTC 2010

On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 11:30 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:

> On Sun, 5 Sep 2010, Rob Withers wrote:
>  I did some rework so that all plugins build on Cog.  This mainly entailed
>> pulling MD5Plugin from a previous version and renaming several methods
>> implemented with the same name in MD5Plugin and SHA256Plugin.  The version
>> is
> What was the point of renaming those methods? In MD5Plugin those methods
> are generated as the category and the method comment states. So renaming
> them without changing the code that generates those methods is not a good
> idea.
> Also the codegenerator should be updated a bit. It should generate code for
> both litte- and big-endian machines and the C compiler should decide which
> method to use based on the platform, so the C code can be shared.
> The current code in the package is generated for 32-bit little-endian
> machines (it may work for 64-bit but that has to be checked).
>  the latest with 'oscog' as the initials.
> I think that the plugin code (Smalltalk) should be the same for SqueakVM
> and CogVM, using the non-pragma declarations.

I agree that they should be the same but feel they should /use/ the pragma
declarations.  We can easily post the pragma declarations support into the
standard Slang (we should merge Cog's and the standard) and as discussed a
few weeks ago there really isn't a compelling argument that says one needs
to be able to run VMMaker in old versions.  That's quite a different
statement to saying it's not useful to support older VMs; it is.  But the VM
definition code doesn't need to be backwards-compatible, unless we want to
be truly shackled.


> Levente
>> All test pass GREEN.
>> Rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20100907/0cc6d349/attachment.htm

More information about the Vm-dev mailing list