> I wonder if the aim of the vm is to be faster than the standard Arc implementation, or just to have a means of reifying the continuation and thus be able to stop a process to do process management.
More of a way of taking advantage of multiple processors/cores while not having to do a lot of process management. Of course, there's not much point in using multiple processors anyway if the VM itself is slow ^^
> I would go for simplicity and copy always. Unless Arc had some kind of inmutable data structure and the vm were able to copy just the mutable parts.
I agree, I did have a plan for a sometimes-sharing, copy-on-write-and-if-receiver-has-a-shared-copy VM, but it felt more complex than necessary.
It would probably be useful to also have binary blobs like in Erlang.
