P.S. In a Squeak 6.0a image both expressions give an array with 18
objects of class 'Global'

Binding subclass: #Global
	instanceVariableNames: 'value'
	classVariableNames: ''
	poolDictionaries: ''
	category: 'Environments-Core'

On 12/30/17, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
> An attempt to summarize this thread:
>
>
> To create a list of globals  Levente proposes
>
>    Array streamContents: [ :stream |
>         Smalltalk globals associationsDo: [ :binding |
>                 binding class == Global ifTrue: [ stream nextPut: binding ]
> ] ].
>
>
> Wheras Eliot has:
>
>    Array streamContents: [ :stream |
>        Smalltalk globals associationsDo: [ :binding |
>            (binding class == Global
>            and:  [ (binding value isBehavior
>            		and: [ binding key == binding value name ]
> 		   ) not
> 		 ]
> 	   ) ifTrue:
>                 [ stream nextPut: binding ] ] ].
>
>
>
> The question is what should be in the 'List of globals'?
>
> a) 'bindings' which are an instance of Global (Levente)
> b) 'bindings' which are an instance of Global and in addition do not
> point to a class. (Eliot)
>
>
> --Hannes
>
> On 4/5/17, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>> On Tue 4. Apr 2017 at 19:05, Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 4 Apr 2017, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Apr 4, 2017, at 7:02 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >       On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 3:47 PM, Eliot Miranda <
>>> eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >             Hi Levente,
>>> >
>>> >             > On Apr 3, 2017, at 11:14 AM, Levente Uzonyi <
>>> leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>>> >             >
>>> >             >  The correct solution is:
>>> >             >
>>> >             > Array streamContents: [ :stream |
>>> >             >    Smalltalk globals associationsDo: [ :binding |
>>> >             >        binding class == Global ifTrue: [ stream nextPut:
>>> binding ] ] ].
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Or shorter
>>> >
>>> >     Smalltalk globals declarations select: #canAssign
>>> >
>>> > maybe? Unlike class bindings, global vars are writable.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I don't like this.  I see writability as orthogonal.  I'm sure there's
>>> good uses for read-only globals that are not classes.  I like the
>>> tenseness
>>> though.  So
>>> >     Smalltalk globals declarations reject: #isClassBinding
>>> >
>>> > with
>>> > isClassBinding ^value isBehavior and: [key == value name]
>>>
>>> Why not just ^true?
>>> It's a ClassBinding even if it's not initialized properly. And that
>>> should
>>> be the Environment's responibility.
>>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >       Why not
>>> >
>>> >       Array streamContents: [ :stream |
>>> >          Smalltalk globals associationsDo: [ :binding |
>>> >              (binding class == Global
>>> >              and: [ binding value isBehavior
>>> >              and: [ binding key == binding value name ] ]) ifTrue:
>>> >                   [ stream nextPut: binding ] ] ].
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Because we want to know the global *variables*, that is everything
>>> > *but*
>>> the class bindings. So we look for instances of Global, not
>>> ClassBinding,
>>> no matter the value.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Forgive me; I missed a not in there.  But my point is that the classes
>>> in global are in bindings whose keys are == to their name.  Everything
>>> else
>>> is a global variable.
>>>
>>> We have separate subclasses: ClassBinding and Global. We should use
>>> those.
>>>
>>> Levente
>>>
>>
>>
>> Yep. Besides, with renaming on import the name of the class is not
>> necessarily the same as its binding key.
>>
>> - Bert -
>>
>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >       > The role of declarations and bindings is still not clear in
>>> Environments, therefore, as I wrote it before, unrelated to tool
>>> support,
>>> I
>>> still consider Environments to be incomplete.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I thought 'declarations' are the things owned by this environment
>>> (excluding imports), whereas 'bindings' are the things visible in this
>>> environment (including imports).
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Is there a definition in text somewhere?  Colin?
>>> >
>>> >       - Bert -
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>