On Thu, 22 May 2003 22:45:05 -0400, Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus wrote
> On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 07:50:19PM -0500, Aaron J Reichow wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 May 2003, Andreas Raab wrote:
> > > BTW, I am very seriously considering doing exactly that - get rid of the
> > > "visibility" of class object in favour of a global context. That this 
could
> > > be implemented by setting the superclass pointer of a "root class" to 
the
> > > environment object in order to make the lookup of the "global functions"
> > > more efficient is a completely different issue.
> > 
> > At the end of the day, what real benefit would this provide?  It'd be an
> > interesting trick, yes.  But would it be modifiable by any developer?
> > Since it is Smalltalk, I assume it would be.  If this invisible root class
> > was modifiable- methods able to be added, removed or changed by
> > developers, what woudl be the point to hide it?
> 
> I'm guessing that the point is to be able to pick up any object and
> drop it in a different environment with different rules.  I'm curious
> to hear more.
> 
> Joshua

i agree (that the point is ...).

> 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Aaron
> > 
> >   Aaron Reichow  ::  UMD ACM Pres  ::  http://www.d.umn.edu/~reic0024/
> >   "if i don't stay true to live and hate, how do i differentiate
> >               between chasing cream and chasing dreams"  :: atmosphere
> >