Arrays / collections with literal syntax - fixed size?
tim at rowledge.org
Mon Jan 7 20:42:45 UTC 2008
On 7-Jan-08, at 12:30 PM, <bryce at kampjes.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Lukas Renggli writes:
>>> Now I was under the impression, that a context had a copy of a
>>> method with copies of the literals, so that you could only modify
>>> copies but not the literals in the compiled method. But it seems
>>> not to
>>> be that way:
>> This would turn a simple message send to be incredibly expensive.
>>> This is evil! :)
>> I want an immutability flag in the object-header!
> It may be better to implement immutability inside the image using
> immutable sub-classes and similar tricks to the write barriers for OO
Eliot was working on an immutability bit in May. Generally speaking
I'd be happy to support it in whatever way he did/does it. Never yet
met anyone as good as him at working this stuff out.
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Oxymorons: Government organization
More information about the Squeak-dev