On 25.10.2010, at 23:10, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > > On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Lawson English <[email protected]> wrote: > In the Wikipedia entry on Smalltalk, there is this line in the history > section, 3rd paragraph, added roughly a year ago: "...Smalltalk-80 added > [[metaclass]]es, to help maintain the "everything is an object" (except > private instance variables) paradigm by associating properties and behavior > with individual classes, ..." > > > Is this one of those esoteric details that mere mortals are not meant to > understand, or is this an error? > > "(except private instance variables)" looks like a dig or a jibe. I would > have put it > > "...Smalltalk-80 added [[metaclass]]es, to help maintain the "everything is > an object" paradigm by allowing classes to have their own specific state and > behavior, ..." > > Perhaps they were trying to say that because Smalltalk lacks private instance > variables Smalltalk objects are not true objects, which is I suppose > arguable. But it makes poor sense to state that private instance variables > aren't objects; public inst vars aren't objects either.
It's plain nonsense. Here's the edit that added the "private instance" modifier: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Smalltalk&diff=prev&oldid=280020438 Someone should just correct it. - Bert -
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
