Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news4.ner.bbnplanet.net!news3.near.net!paperboy.wellfleet.com!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!gatech!news.sprintlink.net!mv!usenet
From: rapp@lmr.mv.com (L. M. Rappaport)
Subject: Re: Smalltalk terminology - Object, Class, and Instance
Message-ID: <DAy8HF.41v@mv.mv.com>
Nntp-Posting-Host: lmr.mv.com
Sender: usenet@mv.mv.com (System Administrator)
Organization: MV Communications, Inc.
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 22:22:47 GMT
References: <3shvfp$l9k@portal.gmu.edu> <altinbayDAu4qq.LpF@netcom.com> <NEWTNews.804276785.29293.sellers@sellers.sellers.com> <DAuMF2.331@mv.mv.com> <DAuzBE.5JH@magi.com> <N.062895.202238.32@fly.europa.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.81
Lines: 22

laird@europa.com wrote:


>> In article <DAuMF2.331@mv.mv.com>, L. M. Rappaport <rapp@lmr.mv.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I believe that a message only becomes a message object if that message 
>> isn't understood by the interpreter.  At that point, a message object is 
>> created and passed as a parameter to the doesNotUnderstand: method.

I didn't write that.  Don't know how you quoted it. :)  I said I
thought that everything is an object even messages.  I am certainly no
expert on Smalltalk, though, and am as likely to be wrong as right!

>> It would be too inefficient to allocate a Message object on every message 
>> send.

It might be true, but I didn't say it. :)

Larry
--


