sure I read everything but I shoud be stupid. So if one day we meet and  
have a white board we will fix that in 5 min.
Now I think that nathanael summarised exactly the situation. Tell us  
what you think about his view because
I agree with him.

Stef


On Jeudi, oct 16, 2003, at 21:40 Europe/Zurich, Andreas Raab wrote:

>>> The system should therefore prevent you from introducing
>>> those shadowed globals even "if you get what you want". In
>>> more cases than not I would presume that the shadowing is
>>> purely accidental, simply introduced because
>>> you didn't even know that the global existed.
>>
>> But I can simply load one package that by accident introduce a class
>> that as the same name as my classVariable and get in trouble.
>
> Yes, you're making my point here.
>
>> This is the idea behind scope I guess so why this is a problem.
>> because if you force the guy loading an unknown package to
>> rewrite his code then this is the worse that we can do
>> to promote packages or even oo.
> [...]
>>> And if the answer is "yes", then what's your argument against
>>> the system enforcing it?
>>
>> Locality of changes.
>
> Did you read my message at
>
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2003-October/ 
> 068144.h
> tml
>
> ? It precisely responds to these issues.
>
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
>
>
>