[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Strange behaviour??
The following (condensed) conversation...
From: mcr@Sandelman.OCUnix.On.Ca (Michael Richardson)
} From the reference manual,
} section 5.4 (page II-17):
} "A private slot is accessible if both the sending method holder
} and the private slot holder are ancestors of the receiver."
I recall reading this.
I didn't quite understand it at the time though...
In essense, I had understood that private slots meant that the
sending method holder had to BE the receiver...
} The above-cited definition of privacy is somewhat abstract, I agree.
I'll take another look.
..suggests to me that the current privacy thing is kind of complicated and hard to understand. I do appreciate the cleverness of the current scheme, which seems appropriate in some sense. But it sure would be nice if there were an easier-to-grok story ...maybe with subjective objects such things would fall out naturally?...