In message <868y47s4vm.fsf at blue.stonehenge.com>
          merlyn at stonehenge.com (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote:

> 
> In the article
> <http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.lang.smalltalk/msg/63af6a2749af4a17>,
> there's a link to
> <http://www.scottishdevelopers.com/downloads/articles/AWeeBletherAboutSmalltalk.pdf>, which claims that Squeak doesn't have Class Instance variables.
>
further mistakes:-

page 2. Only one image is ever in use.... blah balh. Nonsense. I often
run several at once to compare etc.

page 5. Smalltalk supports only single inheritance. Not so; it is
fairly simple to add MI and 'Smalltalk' doesn't need to support it as
such. No language change is needed. What has been found by experiment
(having had a usable if imperfect MI) is that it just isn't worth the
effort.

page 5. ... three pseudo-variables...  hmm, I think I'd include true
false and thisContext but perhaps he's right.

page 12. Class instance varaibles. Looks like he's conmfused not having
the word 'classInstanceVariableNames:' in the class definition string
with not having class instance variables.

Aside from that it's not a bad intro article.


tim
--
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
To be, or not to be, those are the parameters.