>>Also, Glen's observation:
>>
>>>And, for example in the case of our window builder, suffer a large
>>>performance penalty every time you open a window. And that penalty would be
>>>paid by everyone just so that the few people who accidentally store into a
>>>literal array or string would have a better time of it. That's not the
>>>tradeoff we decided to make, and I suspect that this would also be a worse
>>>choice for Squeak.
>>
>>seems a little stange. I thought space for literals was allocated at compile
>>time so the performance penalty he reasonably complains about would occur at
>>window design time. At run-time the memory would already have been allocated
>>and should not impact window opening times. Using Symbols would be an
>>alternative to Strings to save memory but would presumably adversely
>>affect the
>>size of the symbol table.

>I was arguing against the proposal for run-time allocation of string and
>array literal structures and for keeping compile-time literal instantiation
>as is done in Squeak, VW, VSE, VA and as you describe.  In that context, is
>it less strange?

No that makes perfect sense.

Ted Wrinch