On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:20:10AM +0100, Raffaello Giulietti wrote: > probably most of the developers related to Pharo use macOS
Last time (~two years ago) I asked it was about ~1/3 each platform http://www.strawpoll.me/4001583/r (also I didn't make a distinction between desktop and server, so win/mac would be even higher) here's the original thread: http://forum.world.st/quick-poll-which-OS-do-you-use-for-Pharo-td4816222.html Maybe Marcus knows download rates from files.pharo.org (although this will be heavily skewed by build systems). I would argue that its simply easier to find Mac/Linux low-level experts and contributors than Windows as the developer culture (including OSS and contributions) is different. Peter > > > > On 2017-03-07 04:58, Hernán Morales Durand wrote: > >Just asking, > > > >Did someone already tried to get funding to update the Windows VM? > >Because it's like the 90% of the world still uses Windows... > > > >Regards, > > > >Hernán > > > > > > > >2017-03-02 12:51 GMT-03:00 Clément Bera <bera.clem...@gmail.com > ><mailto:bera.clem...@gmail.com>>: > > > > Hi Raffaello, > > > > Reportedly, the VM without the JIT (pure interpreter, also called > > PharoS or StackVM) works on windows 64 and FFI works with it if > > the VM compiled with clang but not with gcc. There is no > > configuration for Pharo right now. It should not be hard to add a > > pharo configuration to have the image start-up, but I don't think > > several libraries such as Athens/Cairo or libgit would work out of > > the box, so it's not clear such a configuration would make a lot > > of sense. There is no PharoS-spur64 repository on files.pharo.org > > <http://files.pharo.org> right now either. > > > > Windows support is not ready mostly because: > > - Some C types are different in x64 between Unix and windows > > - Calling conventions are different in x64 bits between Unix and > > Windows > > > > Calling conventions have impact in switching between the > > interpreter and the JIT runtime and in FFI. > > C types being different have impact for the VM compilation and in FFI. > > > > If someone looks into it, I guess in a day of work we could have > > the Stack VM working with Spur 64 for Pharo without support for > > some librairies. There might be uncommon crashes to fix over the > > first week of use. With several more weeks of work (maybe a couple > > months), the StackVM with all libraries should be > > production-ready. The JIT support will take more time, hopefully > > it will be done in a year from now. > > > > Maybe I should mention that the company who funded 64 bits support > > is using the VM on Mac for development and Linux for production, > > so Windows was not a priority and not done. We have to rely on > > open-source contributors, non paid, to add Windows support and > > that takes time. Nicolas Cellier added the support for the 64 bits > > Stack VM on his free time. If someone is investing money, the 64 > > bits Windows VM could reach production sooner (I guess within 6 > > months) because someone could work full time on it. > > > > Regards, > > > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 4:04 PM, <raffaello.giulie...@lifeware.ch > > <mailto:raffaello.giulie...@lifeware.ch>> wrote: > > > > On 07/02/17 07:13, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > > > > > >> On 6 Feb 2017, at 21:41, Cyril Ferlicot D. > > <cyril.ferli...@gmail.com <mailto:cyril.ferli...@gmail.com>> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Le 06/02/2017 à 21:31, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-users a écrit : > > >> > > >> > > >> Hi! > > >> > > >> IIRC, the windows VM will need some more time to be ready. > > Only Linux > > >> and OSX ones are usable at the moment. > > > > > > ^ this. > > > as Cyril says, win 64bits vm is still not ready (and it will > > take some more time to be). > > > > > > Esteban > > > > > > > > > Just for general curiosity, what are the main stumbling blocks > > in the > > road to a Windows 64 bit Pharo? > > > > > > Raffaello > > > > > > > > >
