Hi Max,

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Max Leske <maxleske@gmail.com> wrote:

��

On 22 Sep 2016, at 20:28, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Bert, Hi All,

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:55 PM, <commits@source.squeak.org> wrote:
[snip]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/packages/2016-September/068930.html

Name: System-bf.916
Ancestors: System-bf.915

Replace VM-level ImageSegment loading with a Smalltalk implementation for old (interpreter-era) projects.

Also removes support for writing segments.

This overrides the Spur support introduced in System-eem.758.

��So one question is should we delete VM support for ImageSegment from the Spur VM?�� There's at least 1.5k of generated source for the Spur ImageSegment load and save support, some 2% of the interpreter/primitives source code.�� That's a lot, and the code is complex and ugly.�� If it never really worked before IMO we should nuke it asap.�� If it worked in some fashion perhaps we can schedule its demise for the 6.0 release's VM.

What do others think?

As long as you don��t remove it from the Cog VM��s until I no longer need it I��m fine with that.

And when would that be?�� Do you mean that you use it in ways not covered by Bert's modifications (which render the VM support superfluous), or do you mean that you use ImageSegment as a naive consumer and are happy just so long as it works?

��

Max

_,,,^..^,,,_
best,��Eliot

_,,,^..^,,,_

best,��Eliot