On 10/25/10 2:23 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
> On 25.10.2010, at 23:10, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net 
>> <mailto:lenglish5 at cox.net>> wrote:
>>
>>     In the Wikipedia entry on Smalltalk, there is this line in the
>>     history section, 3rd paragraph, added roughly a year ago:
>>      "...Smalltalk-80 added [[metaclass]]es, to help maintain the
>>     "everything is an object" (except private instance variables)
>>     paradigm by associating properties and behavior with individual
>>     classes, ..."
>>
>>
>>     Is this one of those esoteric details that mere mortals are not
>>     meant to understand, or is this an error?
>>
>>
>> "(except private instance variables)" looks like a dig or a jibe.  I 
>> would have put it
>>
>>  "...Smalltalk-80 added [[metaclass]]es, to help maintain the 
>> "everything is an object" paradigm by allowing classes to have their 
>> own specific state and behavior, ..."
>> Perhaps they were trying to say that because Smalltalk lacks private 
>> instance variables Smalltalk objects are not true objects, which is I 
>> suppose arguable.  But it makes poor sense to state that private 
>> instance variables aren't objects; public inst vars aren't objects 
>> either.
>
> It's plain nonsense. Here's the edit that added the "private instance" 
> modifier:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smalltalk&diff=prev&oldid=280020438 
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smalltalk&diff=prev&oldid=280020438>
>
> Someone should just correct it.
>
So now I just confused (more). Instance variables are NOT objects in Squeak?


Lawson

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20101025/8e47df55/attachment.htm