Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-13 Thread stepharo
Le 11/6/15 17:00, Stephan Eggermont a écrit : On 10/06/15 20:36, Trygve Reenskaug wrote: In which way is the Pharo technology that underlies Moose more complex than BabyIDE? Porting BabyIDE from Squeak 3.10 to 4.5 was hard because it extends the Squeak Parser and debugger and that this is unk

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-12 Thread Tudor Girba
If I understand correctly, your case is that it is easier to move from Squeak to JavaScript than to move from Squeak to Pharo. I must be missing something important. Could you clarify? Cheers, Doru On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Trygve Reenskaug wrote: > I rest my case. > --Trygve > > On 1

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-12 Thread Trygve Reenskaug
I rest my case. --Trygve On 10.06.2015 20:57, Serge Stinckwich wrote: If I remember correctly, it was easy to port Moose from VW to Pharo, because there was a lot of tests. I'm currently working on porting another software from VW to Pharo without any tests and I'm suffering;-)

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-11 Thread Tudor Girba
Hi, On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Trygve Reenskaug wrote: > Stef, > Why be sorry? It's great that you have a stable kernel in Pharo. Where do > I find the definition of the Pharo public API? > That is an interesting request coming from someone that > In which way is the Pharo technology

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-11 Thread Stephan Eggermont
On 10/06/15 20:36, Trygve Reenskaug wrote: In which way is the Pharo technology that underlies Moose more complex than BabyIDE? Porting BabyIDE from Squeak 3.10 to 4.5 was hard because it extends the Squeak Parser and debugger and that this is unknown territory to me. There remains, of course, m

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-10 Thread Serge Stinckwich
If I remember correctly, it was easy to port Moose from VW to Pharo, because there was a lot of tests. I'm currently working on porting another software from VW to Pharo without any tests and I'm suffering ;-) On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:36 PM, Trygve Reenskaug wrote: > Stef, > Why be sorry? It's

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-10 Thread Trygve Reenskaug
Stef, Why be sorry? It's great that you have a stable kernel in Pharo. Where do I find the definition of the Pharo public API? In which way is the Pharo technology that underlies Moose more complex than BabyIDE? Porting BabyIDE from Squeak 3.10 to 4.5 was hard because it extends the Squeak P

Re: [Pharo-users] Mac Squeak binary virtual machine for Squeak 3.10.2

2015-06-09 Thread stepharo
I'm sorry to say that Pharo public API does not change that much. We could port all Moose in one afternoon and Moose is certainly more complex :). Stef Le 9/6/15 18:07, Trygve Reenskaug a écrit : Hi Chris, I'm sorry to say that your advice didn't work. Worse: The Squeak community has lost a