Am 02.05.2013 um 13:45 schrieb Norbert Hartl <norb...@hartl.name>:
>
> Am 02.05.2013 um 06:03 schrieb Igor Stasenko <siguc...@gmail.com>:
>
>> #SomeName asGlobal
>>
>> (or suggest more appropriate/precise method name for a symbol)
>
> I think if you write
>
> asGlobalWhat?
>
> the problems with this becomes visible. As Steph wrote there is asClass which
> does it for the case you are looking for a class. I'm not sure how common the
> use case
>
> Smalltalk at: #foo put: somethingThatIsNotAClass
>
> is. Your selector is somewhat orthogonal to asClass as you define access via
> reachability and not via type. But trying to imagine the future asGlobal is
> not a good selector. At least I hope the "global" will go away completely. In
> that case it wouldn't be good to rely on. Another possibility that would make
> sense is
>
> asBinding (or a better name)
what about #bound or even #bind ?
can be extended to #boundObject …
Best
-Tobias
>
> but that would only be good if it would search scopes upwards. So it can look
> into e.g. block -> method -> class -> environment -> ? And that would defeat
> the purpose of your mail in another way.
>
> So what is your rationale? My gut says I like the idea but I can't think of a
> useful selector/concept to make it a viable option.
>
> Norbert
