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!