[squeak-dev] Re: Smalltalk vs SmalltalkImage current woes

Klaus D. Witzel klaus.witzel at cobss.com
Fri Jul 24 11:28:28 UTC 2009


On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 12:39:07 +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> 2009/7/24 Klaus D. Witzel :
...
>>> So, what i'm proposing:
...
>>> then simply:
>>> Smalltalk at: #Smalltalk put: (SmalltalkImage current).
>>
>> This part will not work, check yourself:
>>
>>  (Smalltalk associationAt: #Smalltalk) inspect
>>
> in what way it wont work?

I was responding to a practical issue, not a conceptual one; try

  Smalltalk at: #Smalltalk put: Smalltalk

then you should see why that's not possible.

> I can implement #associationAt: in SmalltalkImage class, to proxy it
> to globals ivar. What's wrong with it?

With #associationAt: in SmalltalkImage? nothing, if it still makes sense.

> Or do you mean, that we will end up with the need of proxying all
> Collection protocol methods?

Some of them: yes; unless you get rid of "Dictionary" users' view.

> There always can be more radical solutions, like proxying rest of
> stuff through DNU handler :)

:)

>> /Klaus




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list