gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.general

Mark Volkmann | 10 Oct 04:54

porting Squeak ... Java

I see there was a project named Talks2 that attempted to port  
Smalltalk (maybe not Squeak) to the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). Does  
anyone know if that project is still active?

Is there a web site that describes what is involved in creating new  
ports? I understand most of Squeak is implemented in Smalltalk and  
that only a small core needs to be ported in order for it to run on  
new platforms.

Beyond getting Squeak to run on the JVM, another goal might be to  
enable generation Java bytecode from Smalltalk classes. That would  
make it possible to implement libraries using Smalltalk syntax that  
can be used by Java developers. Another would be to come up with a way  
to wrap Java libraries so they can be easily invoked from Smalltalk  
code. Do these seem like unreasonable goals?

---
Mark Volkmann

Attachment (smime.p7s): application/pkcs7-signature, 5706 bytes

headers

Michael van der Gulik | 10 Oct 05:10

Re: porting Squeak ... Java

On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Mark Volkmann <mark <at> ociweb.com> wrote:

I see there was a project named Talks2 that attempted to port Smalltalk (maybe not Squeak) to the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). Does anyone know if that project is still active?

No, but JSqueak is Squeak on the Java VM: http://research.sun.com/projects/JSqueak/.

Gulik.

--
http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/

headers

Bergel, Alexandre | 11 Oct 07:23

Re: porting Squeak ... Java

Hi Mark,

I worked on a translator Smalltalk --> Java.
http://www.squeaksource.com/Smalltalk2Java.html

I wrote something on it http://bergel.eu/download/TranslatingSmalltalkToJava.pdf

Cheers,
Alexandre

On 10 Oct 2008, at 04:55, Mark Volkmann wrote:

> I see there was a project named Talks2 that attempted to port  
> Smalltalk (maybe not Squeak) to the Java Virtual Machine (JVM). Does  
> anyone know if that project is still active?
>
> Is there a web site that describes what is involved in creating new  
> ports? I understand most of Squeak is implemented in Smalltalk and  
> that only a small core needs to be ported in order for it to run on  
> new platforms.
>
> Beyond getting Squeak to run on the JVM, another goal might be to  
> enable generation Java bytecode from Smalltalk classes. That would  
> make it possible to implement libraries using Smalltalk syntax that  
> can be used by Java developers. Another would be to come up with a  
> way to wrap Java libraries so they can be easily invoked from  
> Smalltalk code. Do these seem like unreasonable goals?
>
> ---
> Mark Volkmann
>
>
>
>
>

--

-- 
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.