[squeak-dev] Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 4538 and CompiledMethod
Henrik Sperre Johansen
henrik.s.johansen at veloxit.no
Mon Sep 19 08:10:52 UTC 2011
Nicolas Cellier wrote:
> And I don't think the example of Henrik is worth :
> Lets just change it a bit:
> Object subclass: #SuperFoo.!
> Object subclass: #Bar.!
> SuperFoo subclass: #Foo.!
> SuperFoo compile: 'bar ^1'.
> Foo compile: 'bar
> ^super bar *2'.
> foo := Foo new.
> Smalltalk at: #Foo put: Bar.
> ^foo bar
> Could you predict the result (will it try to invoke super Bar bar) ?
> Yes, since the last association is shared, we just broke (foo
> class>>bar) *for no reason*...
Didn't see this untill now...
I have to disagree with "for no reason", we broke it for a very /particular/
reason; the user specifically replaced Foo with Bar.
TBH, I'd rather the system do what I tell it to do, rather than not because
it is too important for the system to allow me to jeopardize it. My buddy
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Re-Pharo-project-Issue-4538-and-CompiledMethod-equality-tp3816284p3823249.html
Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the Squeak-dev