2009/10/29 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>: > Hi > > just to share a ugly design point with MethodReference > > MethodReference are created using > > MethodReference class: aClass symbol: aSymbol > > however they store the class ***name*** > > and after when you query the class using either actualClass or > methodClass > you get the class that is in Smalltalk. > > So if like me you copied the class then you will get another version > of your class > even if this is the right one you use to create the MethodReference.... > > One of these days we will have to check that >
Yes, i wondering myself, what is the point to reference the methods in such style. The way, how actual class & its method get resolved makes it impossible to reference a method in arbitrary class object, especially one which is not installed into system dictionary. I think its lacking additional form of indirection, which should be an environment object who is responsible for delivering the method's source code along with resolving the class by its name. Without such indirection, i see no point in having a MethodReference per se, because you can always do the same thing by yourself , i.e. (Smalltalk at: #SomeClass) methodDict at: #someSelector. Without that, i see no point why i would want to use it, because it always points to same thing, no matter where i using the MethodReference. > Stef > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
