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

Igor Stasenko siguctua at gmail.com
Tue Mar 2 12:18:28 UTC 2010


On 2 March 2010 13:35, Michael Haupt <mhaupt at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Nicolas Cellier
> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I like Keith proposition, and  I think it's also urgent to read the
>> Newspeak ones before making any modification
>
> I also generally like the idea of binding things via messages instead
> of via global state, and the Newspeak pointer is just right in this
> regard.
>
> But I believe we must not forget that Newspeak is extremely consequent
> in that everything is late-bound; Smalltalk just isn't. (Newspeak even
> late-binds super classes at object instantiation time.)
>
> Apart from that, Object is already rather cluttered.
>
then how about:

thisContext environment "system globals"
thisContext image
thisContext navigation
thisContext sourceFiles
...
?


> Some questions:
> How appropriate would such a model be in Smalltalk?
> Is there a scenario where "the image" would not be global state? (Hydra?)
>

It is. When you building things from scratch, using different object model,
experimenting etc it is important to keep your code and objects
isolated from usual object graph.

> Note that I'm not totally opposed to these ideas, just skeptical. :-)
>
> Best,
>
> Michael
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list