3 ms·
> The way how they react on the messages is full the responsibility of objects, and they can refuse them. Thereby any further protection is totally up to the p
by tresilience 6y ago
> The way how they react on the messages is full the responsibility of objects, and they can refuse them.
Thereby any further protection is totally up to the programmer right?
- xkriva11 6y agoYes. It is actually very easy to extend Smalltalk to support private/protected methods (message bytecode based on the protocols, for example). But Smalltalk would need to do these checks in run-time because all message sends are late-bound.
- tresilience 6y agoThanks! Can you point me to where I can find out more about the eval-"loop" that the entire Smalltalk runs on?
- xkriva11 6y agoCheck the Blue Book: http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr/FreeBooks/BlueBook/Bluebook.pdf http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr/FreeBooks/BlueBook/Bluebook....