On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 12:18:34AM +0200, Norbert Hartl wrote: > > > Am 14.09.2017 um 00:09 schrieb Eliot Miranda <eliot.mira...@gmail.com>: > > > > Hi Denis, > > > > On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 9:29 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisi...@gmail.com > > <mailto:dionisi...@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Hi Eliot. > > > > I know and I only talk about new messages. I am not trying to rethink full > > meta model of Smalltalk. > > By the way #class is very common message and it is handy to use short name. > > But pinning messages will be used rarely in very specific applications. So > > no much sense to preserve them in short version. > > > > Agreed. So we have to decide whether to go with pinInMemory or pinObject, > > pinObject being suggested by Norbert because it matched isReadOnlyObject. > > Personally I like pinInMemory. Norbert, do you feel strongly about > > pinObject et al? > > > No I don't. It feels only good to me if there is a requirement not to > implement selectors that are likely to be used in user code. I'm ok with > pinInMemory although I asked myself where can it be pinned elsewhere if not > in memory. So the suffix in memory doesn't add anything but also moves the > selector out of user space. >
+1 I also like pinInMemory because it is easy to read and it describes exactly what the method does. It pins the object to some location in the object memory. Once you stick a pin in it, the object stops moving around in the object memory. Nice. Dave
