[squeak-dev] Re: Menu Registries

Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
Wed Apr 28 16:18:47 UTC 2010


2010/4/28 Hannes Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com>:
> OK, Andreas was faster than me....
>
> He says that the annotation scheme is perfectly consistent with
>
>    1. "an object is send a message and responds with an object"
>
> Could this please be elaborated a bit
>
> --Hannes
>

There is no magic hidden in the VM.
All Menu§Item discovery is achieved by reflection and sending messages
to objects.

Nicolas

>
> On 4/28/10, Hannes Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 4/28/10, Brent Pinkney <brent at zamail.co.za> wrote:
>>> Hi all,+
>>>
>>> Could those in the know comment on how this <...> proposal is (or is not)
>>> consistent with the fundamental Smalltalk principles
>>> that:
>>>
>>> 1. "an object is send a message and responds with an object"
>>> 2. there is no other "magic" in the system.
>>>
>>> Are we proposing a break fromv this ?
>> YES, actually it has already happened. You like me one week ago were
>> just not aware of it.
>>
>> If so, IMO we need to really get it
>>> right before we commit.
>>
>> Yes, I agree. And this discussion is on-going. I'm glad you joined.
>> In the writeup of Andreas
>>
>> Annotations for Service Discovery
>> http://squeakingalong.wordpress.com/2010/04/27/annotations-for-service-discovery/
>>
>> he uses the word 'orthogonal'.
>>
>> I think it is helpful to think of method annotations of something
>> 'orthogonal' to regular Smalltalk source code. Like CSS is
>> 'orthogonal' to HTML.
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>>
>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Brent
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list