Hi clement I was confused. I did not understand the problem. Not enough concentration right now.
Stef On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Clément Bera <[email protected]> wrote: > In the VM primitiveSlotAt: / at:Put: mean access to any field (pointer or > non pointer, sorry for the confusion Marcus earlier on) of an object. The > primitive in the image can be named fieldAt:/fieldAt:put: if it makes more > sense for Pharo. > > #[0] slotAt: 1 => 0 > #(#a) slotAt: 1 => #a > 0@2 slotAt: 1 => 0 > With Pharo 6 blocks: > | t | t := #tmp. {[ t ] slotAt: 3 . [ t ] slotAt: 4} => { 0 "numArgs". #tmp > } > > Right now you can do that with instVarAt: on the contrary to what instVarAt: > comment states, and this is wrong. > > On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 24 Nov 2017, at 00:21, Clément Bera <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 12:00 AM, Stephane Ducasse >> <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Did you talk with marcus? >> >> >> I don't understand the connection between slots and this problem with >> primitives. >>> >>> >> >> There is no connection, just the same name. >> >> For Slots aka First Class Instance variables: >> >> I sometimes think that Slot for the first class instance variables might >> not be a good name, but then, >> the only alternative would be “instance variable”, but that is not that >> nice either, as these Slots include >> virtual variables (that are computed) or variables that are combine stored >> in a hidden base slot (e.g. >> used for BooleanSlot or PropertySlot). >> >> So for now I will keep the Slot term… >> >> >> Marcus > > > > > -- > Clément Béra > Pharo consortium engineer > https://clementbera.wordpress.com/ > Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
