2010/10/25 Lawson English <lenglish5 at cox.net>:
> 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> 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
> Someone should just correct it.
>
> So now I just confused (more). Instance variables are NOT objects in Squeak?
>

This has to be german here...
Temp and instance variable point to some objetcs, but are not reified
as Objects by themselves...
Technically, there are just an offset (instance variable = offset in
receiver object, temp variable = offset in the context).

Nicolas

>
> Lawson
>
>
>
>
>