> On 24.04.2020, at 18:41, Jakob Reschke <forums.jakob at resfarm.de> wrote:
> 
> But you already know that this is a class name (hence classNamed:), not just any name. And the name is complete (not a fragment), so there won't be any waste in the Symbol table.

Do you know that classNamed supports this?

Smalltalk classNamed: 'Morph class'

Best regards
	-Tobias

> 
> One could only argue whether it is an implementation detail that classes are bound to Symbols and that their names are Symbols. You could ask the same for selectors.
> 
> Otherwise, I would not write x = 1.0 if I know that x is always an integer (or the other way around).
> 
> 
> 
> Marcel Taeumel <marcel.taeumel at hpi.de> schrieb am Fr., 24. Apr. 2020, 16:39:
> > Class and selector names should be symbolic.  They're keys to accessing specific objects in the system...
> 
> Sure, but that's the next level of interpretation of the term "name" in the specific class context. Without knowing anything, I would always choose strings over symbols for something that requests a name because names don't have to be identical, they just label stuff.
> 
> Best,
> Marcel
>> Am 24.04.2020 00:50:50 schrieb Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>:
>> 
>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 5:37 AM Marcel Taeumel <marcel.taeumel at hpi.de> wrote:
>> > Note that "Smalltalk classNamed: ..." is not Environments-friendly
>> 
>> Good to know! What to use instead?
>> 
>> > Also, why not use a Symbol for the class name?
>> 
>> Name feels like string. Symbol feels like "key".
>> 
>> Class and selector names should be symbolic.  They're keys to accessing specific objects in the system...
>> 
> 
>