Re: [Pharo-dev] Git written entirely in Smalltalk?

2016-02-24 Thread Richard Sargent
Ben Coman wrote > Max, > > The other say I was contemplating having a git implementation written > entirely in Pharo, and today I bumped into something from your history > (~2011?) [1] indicating this might have been attempted. I'm curious > why this was abandoned in favour of libgit bindings.

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git written entirely in Smalltalk?

2016-02-24 Thread Damien Cassou
Ben Coman writes: > The other say I was contemplating having a git implementation written > entirely in Pharo, and today I bumped into something from your history > (~2011?) [1] indicating this might have been attempted. I'm curious > why this was abandoned in favour of libgit bindings. Max d

Re: [Pharo-dev] Git written entirely in Smalltalk?

2016-02-24 Thread Max Leske
:) It wasn’t a complete implementation but entirely written in Pharo, yes. The reason I decided to go for bindings is that Git is quite big. There are many things to implement and there’s a lot of mystery when it comes to implementation details. Using bindings reduces the cost of maintenance a

[Pharo-dev] Git written entirely in Smalltalk?

2016-02-24 Thread Ben Coman
Max, The other say I was contemplating having a git implementation written entirely in Pharo, and today I bumped into something from your history (~2011?) [1] indicating this might have been attempted. I'm curious why this was abandoned in favour of libgit bindings. [1] http://scg.unibe.ch/wik