[self-interest] Improvements to Self?

[Ian Woollard]

Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote:
> Better late than never, I suppose...
> 
> On Tuesday 14 August 2001 20:47, Ian Woollard wrote:
> 
>>>Indeed, I was just wondering what your ":" brought us that we
>>>didn't have with Self's "<-".
>>>
>>Several things-
>>
>>a) it can be used for privacy- by inheriting the handle object
>>appropriately you can add checking into the object so that it
>>only allows certain objects to talk to it.
>>
> 
> Right.
> 
> 
>>b) non builtin syntax can be added to the handle object like:
>>
>>c++.
>>c += 5.
>>
>>etc.
>>
>>Also, reference semantics are useful in their own right.
>>
> 
> Hmmmm... this seems to me like the opposite of a).

Brevity in a language is a very good thing. There is a good correlation
between number of lines of code per week that engineers can write.

> Here you are
> exposing things that would be better handled internally.

It's important to expose the right things. If I want to pass an objects
variables to an editor for editing then I should be allowed to. I
should not have to jump through hoops to give something that
the language can give; I've had to jump the hoops in Java- no references
(lvalues in C speak) are a serious restriction in the expressibility of
the language. There are ways; but they are not good; I've found.

Elegance of code is important.

how would you do:

newIntegerBrowser: &myIntSlot.

in Self?

> -- Jecel

-- 
- Ian Woollard (ian.woollard at tesco.net)

"Is a planetary surface the right place for an expanding technological 
civilization?"
- Gerard O'Neill