2010/1/17 Levente Uzonyi <[email protected]>: > 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 >
Sure, object databases are more interesting applications, since you generally make such mistake only once. As a beginner, I put a halt in the method once identified as the source of the problem, and did not understand my mistake at first shot since it started working again (being recompiled). The good thing is that it helped me learning some Smalltalk superpowers faster :). Nicolas >> 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 > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
