Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pdn!alan From: alan@pdn.UUCP (Alan Lovejoy) Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk Subject: Re: Is SELF a naughty OOP construct? Message-ID: <3341@pdn.UUCP> Date: 1 Jun 88 19:00:20 GMT References: <1620001@hplb29a.HPL.HP.COM> <80500035@uiucdcsp> Reply-To: alan@pdn.UUCP (0000-Alan Lovejoy) Organization: Paradyne Corporation, Largo, Florida Lines: 21 In article <80500035@uiucdcsp> johnson@uiucdcsp.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >Alan Lovejoy wishes that it were possible to write a single operation >that would work commutitively. In other words, he wants to write one The point I'm trying to make about "self" has nothing to do with commutivity. Unfortunately, my earlier posting appears to have misled everyone on this point. I apologize. So what is my point? Simply this: "self" is a special case. The rules regarding its use are different than those of other variables, and it therefore inhibits polymorphism. That's it. I rest my case. -- Alan Lovejoy; alan@pdn; 813-530-8241; Paradyne Corporation: Largo, Florida. Disclaimer: Do not confuse my views with the official views of Paradyne Corporation (regardless of how confusing those views may be). Motto: Never put off to run-time what you can do at compile-time!