[Pharo-project] Smalltalk for small projects only?
gstepken at googlemail.com
Sun Jan 29 21:12:19 CET 2012
I often discuss with Frank Lesser about Smalltalk compiler internals. He
has written a Smalltalk VM (GVM), that is written in Assembler and jits
Smalltalk directly dynamically into Intel machine code, that is *faster*
than C in normal cases, expecially when fine tuned, able to run VS, VA,
Squeak, Dolphin, Lesser Smalltalk in their own namespace, and MP!!! Sounds
strange, because of different implementations (bytecode, callbacks...). GC
runs on a 2.nd processor, what means, no more interruptions, Real Time
Availability!!! If you want, you can control all traffic signs of NY within
one Intel machine.
He proofes, that Smalltalk, expecially Pharo is far away from being at the
(And yes, i try to convince him to take part in the "language shootout" and
make his GVM MIT license) :-)
regards, Guido Stepken
Am 29.01.2012 20:51 schrieb "Philippe Marschall" <kustos at gmx.net>:
> On 29.01.2012 19:39, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>> No, it does not.
>>>> Please elaborate: I really can't see the difference between doing a
>>>> merge (either an easy one or a more diffucult one over multiple files,
>>>> spread over a couple of days, with intervening changes by others) using
>>>> either Monticello or Git.
>>> The scalability limits of Monticello are well understood. PackageInfo
>>> doesn't scale, at all. You put too many classes in a package, and
>>> snapshotting gets really slow. Don't believe me? Make a change in Morphic
>>> which has only 200 classes and save it.
>> You confuse artifacts and models.
> No, because in the real world compared to the Smalltalk Theoretic Perfect
> World it doesn't matter how things could scale, it matters how things do
> scale. See 
>  http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?**SufficientlySmartCompiler<http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SufficientlySmartCompiler>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-project