On 2013-03-12, at 12:59, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2013/3/12 Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>:
>> 
>> On 2013-03-12, at 12:33, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 2013/3/12 Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>:
>>> 
>>>> Isn't #value too general to serve as a specially treated token in the decompiler? It might easily appear in code.
>>>> 
>>>> I'd think it would be better if the compiler emitted a unique message selector that the decompiler could reliably recognize. Maybe #pvtValue, which cannot be used in regular code anyway?
>>>> 
>>>> - Bert -
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> That's a good question.
>>> If we want to be able to define different behaviors with delegation in
>>> mind, pvtValue seems a bit restrictive.
>> 
>> Why? #value can easily implemented as "^self pvtValue". It's really only so that that we can distinguish the compiler-generated selector from a user-typed selector.
>> 
> 
> As I understand it, yes, this way is possible, but isn't the other way
> forbidden ?
> 
> pvtValue
>    ^delegate pvtValue
> 
> Unless of course we change selector at first indirection.


Or use "delegate perform: #pvtValue".

That said, what selector would you propose?

- Bert -