Monticello status

Avi Bryant avi at
Mon Apr 7 08:34:00 UTC 2003

On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Stephane Ducasse wrote:

> So having explicit instance variable is really simple to add.

I think so, yes.  Last time I remember considering it, I got hung up on
prereqs... ah, yes, it would require method declarations to know which
inst vars they used (since those have to be loaded before the method can
compile), and that seemed a bit of a hassle.  I guess you have to ask the
method for its prerequisite variable names (it won't be able to tell from
the source whether they're inst, class, pool etc variables) and
search through first the image and then the rest of the declarations to
resolve them - the same thing that happens right now for superclasses, for
example.  So I wouldn't call it really simple, but it can (and should)
certainly be done.

> This is clear but we can imagine a normal use for now and see later.
> Once you have explicit support for package then the package becomes the
> palce where you want to attached this information.

> Just having a package, bundle classes containing other declaration
> would be enough.
> I guess.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list