No, I disagree... expose as names elements of the architecture is a bad choice.�

bad marketing to choose ugly names, just for the sake of our techie guys (my self included :P)

the unique official VM for pharo will be called Pharo, and it will be a Cog VM with our additions.

we also will provide another supplementary VM (the StackVM, with a suffix, to accomplish 2 thins: make clear that is not the official, and provide information about why is there). It will be there because is more portable and more stable (for now, we hope to have same stability with the cog soon).�

We don't need two suffixes, just one, because the official vm is just one.�

Esteban

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:26 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:

I there is going to be a suffix for the VM, I would name them PharoJIT
and PharoStack. So both have suffixes, otherwise Pharo"S" sounds like
it has something else the "clean" Pharo doesn't.

Just my view on naming things.

Regards,

Esteban A. Maringolo

2013/2/5 St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:

> Camillo
>
> the stackVM can be important as a fallback
> So we can have Pharo and PharoS (as slow and stack)