From: Peter Suk Date: 2005-04-09T06:12:57+09:00 Subject: Re: Seven new VMs, all in a row On Apr 8, 2005, at 2:39 PM, itsme213 wrote: > "Peter Suk" wrote in message > >> I thought I'd talk about my new project here > > Sounds fantastic, I can't wait! > >> And for those of you sharp enough to wonder: yes, we can >> handle Modules, Mixins, and fully qualified Method names without >> changing the Smalltalk VMs. (At least those that have Namespaces.) > > Which ones do? Avi pointed out that we don't really need them -- Smalltalk Namespaces are really just data-structures to inform the Compiler, so we can have Namespaces on top of any Smalltalk VM. > And what of Ruby 2.0 selector namesapces? Will they happen? And will > that > map readily to a Smalltalk VM? Selector namespaces are hard. We can do them with compiler tricks. We'll just have to tackle that when it comes. (And who knows, maybe Ruby2/Rite will make the Alumina (Ruby on a Smalltalk VM) superfluous? I hope so. I hope Ruby2/Rite will be right and we'll have a meta-level that is freely manipulable as 1st class Objects. --Peter -- There's neither heaven nor hell, save what we grant ourselves. There's neither fairness nor justice, save what we grant each other.