[Aaaahhhhhh - lightning strikes] RE: [Q] mixin pattern - ho w to use an alternate Behavior for Class
tim at sumeru.stanford.edu
Mon Jan 28 21:29:37 UTC 2002
"Withers, Robert" <rwithers at quallaby.com> is claimed by the authorities to have written:
> Nice try, tim. It is at least rotationally conservative, but you completely
> left out the relativistic SU(5) group component to ensure that the Lorenz
> transformation remains time conservative. Thus, no Taylor expansion
> allowed. We gotta have that - how else would the duct tape work? I mean it
> wouldn't be sticky then would it, since you just decided that no covalent
> bonds can form? Ee << -Ew! hell, we wouldn't even be able to think about
> it, with all our receptors being so non-receptive, as a result. Thank god
> for covalent bonds - seeing as how Smalltalk relies on them so heavily.
Actually..... there's always Van der Walls forces. A non-covalent (I
think; no doubt somebody can correct me if I'm wrong) 'sticky' force
that is used to exquisite effect by Geckos for example.
Rather like polite society, VdW forces hold things together without
actually swapping vital fluids, just by a sort of affinity. Sort of
'just friends' :-)
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Any programming language is at its best before it is implemented and used.
More information about the Squeak-dev