> Anyway, wouldn't you consider pool variables an
> anti-pattern in most cases as they break any
> encapsulation?

Shared pools break encapsulation no more or less
than any class reference or class-side accessor or
Singleton in your code.

Whether to use a message send or direct access via
a pool goes along the lines of accessors-vs-instVar-Access.
I prefer message sends. Direct access can be faster,
which I exploited in Squeak FFI type accessors and
generated code.

Best,
Marcel
Am 11.07.2022 17:57:06 schrieb Thiede, Christoph <christoph.thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
Intuitively, I would expect to see them there. After looking up a class definition, it would be surprising if "certain variables of any kind that belong to the class" are not reachable through the variables button.

(Anyway, wouldn't you consider pool variables an anti-pattern in most cases as they break any encapsulation?)

Best,
Christoph
Von: Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im Auftrag von Taeumel, Marcel
Gesendet: Montag, 11. Juli 2022 15:22:44
An: squeak-dev
Betreff: [squeak-dev] Question about "variables" button in browser
 
Hi all --

We recently fixed the scope of which variable references one can browse via the "variables" button in the code browser.

Is it okay that pool vars are not listed in there?



Best,
Marcel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20220711/09d0e47b/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 120522 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20220711/09d0e47b/attachment-0001.png>