On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Martin McClure wrote:
> Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2010, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
>>
>>> One of my first bug in st80 was
>>>
>>> strange
>>> ^('foo' writeStream) nextPutAll: '-bar'; contents.
>>>
>>> At that time, writing pastEnd did use become:
>>>
>>> But if you really have time to pick an immutability bit in Newspeak,
>>> we don't have to care anymore.
>>
>> If I had a free bit in the object header, I'd use it for extending the
>> identity hash instead of useless things like immutability. IMO it was a
>> mistake to add immutability for literals in other smalltalks only to
>> avoid possible errors generated by the broken stream/collection semantics.
>
> Literal immutability and other object immutability is only one use of
> the so-called "immutability" bit. In reality, this bit is a "track
http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/blog/blogView?entry=3232889180
> modifications" bit, and I find the other uses much more valuable.
I wonder how that works.
Levente
>
> Regards,
>
> -Martin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
