On Thursday, February 13, 2003, at 08:29  PM, Alan Kay wrote:

> That wasn't Andreas' point. See my other recent email about this ...
>
> He was saying that if etoys were extended in many ways, including the 
> list below, then there would be a much better start for much of the 
> programming that most people want to do.
>

Yes, I agree.

Which brings me to a question of whether it makes sense for a Morph to 
know about its player.
Are players inherently useful for objects in general?   Would 
generalizing this make scripting a lot more flexible?

I'm groping for a way to eliminate Morph's dependence on Player while 
making Player/Scripting more general so it works on any kind of object.

Does this sound reasonable or am I missing a key idea?