On 10/24/07, Jason Johnson jason.johnson.081@gmail.com wrote:
No, the plan was that since in Smalltalk objects are mutable, I will have to pay an extra cost for internal message sends and have the VM do a deep copy for the sent objects.
Ack, terminology overload. :) What I meant here is, obviously if I sent a message between two literal images there is no choice but to do a deep copy. Erlang gains some benefit from sending interprocess messages where the sender and receiver are in the same literal image via reference, but I can't because Smalltalk can mutate variables. So this means I have to do the deep copy in *every* case. Unless I make some changes.