Jerome Garcia wrote:
> 
>      This may be a dumb question but I would like to know what it would
>      take to add the capability to not only pass objects and messages
>      between Smalltalk images but be able to pass them to images which do
>      not contain the class definitions for those objects. Basically, it
>      seems to me that it would be nice to be able to do the following:
> 
>      1. Pass a class definition to an image.
>      2. Send that image instances of the class or ask it to instantiate
>      some and initialize them.
>      3. Do something with the class and instances.
>      4. Remove the class definition and instances from the image.

This is pretty easy if your protocol allows for passing MessageNotUnderstood
between images, and for passing stringified class descriptions. You could have a
simple method for passing a class description and the class's accessors and
storeOn/readFrom methods

-- 
stp

	Stephen Travis Pope
	stp at create.ucsb.edu -- http://www.create.ucsb.edu/~stp/