On 5 March 2013 21:54, Colin Putney colin@wiresong.com wrote:
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:53 AM, Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de wrote:
On 2013-03-05, at 02:40, Colin Putney colin@wiresong.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com wrote:
you mean changing compiler to compile "<obj> Foo" message send for accessing Foo name, instead of direct binding access?
Oh, I see. The source code still reads as a variable access, but the bytecode implements a message send.
No, I think Igor is proposing to write something like "self environment Foo" to access Foo. Which is flexible, granted, but looks ugly.
That's what I thought too, but that obviously breaks compatibility with existing code, which Igor claims his proposal does not.
Can you be more specific, what exactly it breaks?
If it is about #bindingOf: which answers association holding key/value pair.. nothing prevents us from answering "LateBoundBinding" which when you send #value to it, actually doing <special object> perform: #Foo (and similar things for write access).
Colin