On 10/24/07, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> No sharing you say? Oh.. don't let me starting on this. How about a
> common procedure of creating a new class? Creating or modifying a
> method in some class?

Ok, when I say "no sharing" I mean of mutable data, which is where all
the problems you and everyone else have mentioned come from.

I have mentioned several times in this thread that classes and code
*are a concern*.  But I think a solvable one.  Doing things to classes
(e.g. creating, renaming, adding methods, removing methods, changing
methods) are a special case now, and they will be a special case in my
proposed system as well.  Note that Erlang has this same issue and
they solved it in their case 10 years ago.  I think this is a solvable
problem.

> Note that these changes propagated globally in current implementation
> due to having a single global namespace (SystemDictionary).
> How you planning to deal with that without breaking a uniform model of
> smalltalk (everything is an object e.t.c)?

As mentioned in probably no less then 10 other emails:  I think the
"ObsoleteClass" mechanism will be workable for this.