[squeak-dev] Re: SmalltalkImage current vs. Smalltalk
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:
> 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
> 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"
> 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. :-)
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the Squeak-dev