On 25 Jun 2014, at 16:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <[email protected]> wrote:
> Slot > \SimpleSlot (current iv slot) Yes, the naming of that one… I think we just need to take the freedom of iterating. For now I called it “InstanceVariableSlot”, but that might be confusing and it is a long word. > \CollectionSlot > \BitmapSlot > Esteban A. Maringolo > > > 2014-06-25 9:38 GMT-03:00 Norbert Hartl <[email protected]>: >> >> Am 25.06.2014 um 14:22 schrieb Marcus Denker <[email protected]>: >> >>> >>> On 25 Jun 2014, at 14:16, Tudor Girba <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Very nice! >>>> >>>> Next would be an example of how to specialize a slot :) >>>> >>> >>> Yes, the next steps are: >>> >>> - introduce abstract superclass for Slot >>> >>> (I am not yet sure: will the be “Slot” and the default slots are >>> “InstVarSlot”, or do I add a >>> “AbstractSlot” class and Slot stays the default? Maybe that’s better) >>> >> I like the former better. But if you do can you please help stop that naming >> scheme? Could we name it InstanceVariableSlot then? Pleeeeaaaase? >> >> Norbert >> >>> - Opal needs to delegate code generation to the Slot. >>> >>> - The abstract slot generates by default reflective read/write access code >>> >>> - subclasses can override. (e.g. the default slot overrides to do >>> pushIvar/storeIvar bytecode) >>> >>> This is the enough to do behavioural changes to simple Slots. >>> >>> After that we need to check the code for “virtual” slots where e.g. >>> multiple Boolean slots are mapped to one >>> hidden flag ivar. >>> >>> And the of course >>> >>> - new class template (optional at first) >>> - Monticello support >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >> >> >
