Re: VSTa

[Martin Lucina <mato@kotelna.sk> writes:]

>> For instance, www.squeak.org is a very powerful Smalltalk
>> implementation which might make a nice starting point for all upper level
>> functions. Imagine where the VSTa kernel runs the disks, ticks the clock,
>> and so forth, and then Squeak powers all the upper level
>> protocols--windowing, mail, UI, graphics, browser, web server, and so
>> forth.
>Sounds interesting. Maybe it's time I leart a new language. The only possible
>danger with the above approach I can see is too tight a binding on the
>implementation language (in this case Smalltalk) which would lead to a loss of
>flexibility? You want to be able to reasonably easily support mainstream
>languages like C/C++?

I'd assume the underlying system would remain present. But that level would
certainly be deemphasized.

>I know I keep talking about doing some work on Linux driver support and then
>never get around to it, but I was discussing this with some friends last week
>and one suggestion made was that I could maybe wrangle a honors project out of
>it, something along the lines of "code reuse". So I'll see how that goes. I
>still have a year or so to go before I start thinking about that and things
>can change in a year. Andy, what do you think?

Updated drivers would be a Good Thing. ISA will be going away shortly, and
VSTa's PCI story is just a hair short of non-existent.

                                                        Andy
Received on Tue Apr 20 09:05:35 1999