7 Nov
2008
7 Nov
'08
7:56 p.m.
when we do not merge a class and its metaclass the
instance variable
of a metaclass could have
an instanceScope since it is true that the instance variable is an
instance one.
Yes
Now when we merge a class and its metaclass the class
instance
variable should have a class scope since
from the base class it is clearly a class scope variable.
humm...
class and metaclass variables will belong to one unique instance scope
I guess.
Why should the class variable be in a different scope? Especially
since a class variable begins with a capitalized letter, which is then
easy to differ from instance variables.
For shared this is simple they are shared and have a
classScope.
When a classes and their respective meta are merged?
Now from a user point of view I would like that an
analysis does not
depend on whether we
merged or not the class and metaclass.
As far as I can see, an analysis may depend on whether you merge
classes and metaclasses.
It seems hard to imagine than any analysis should be depend on whether
there is such a merging.
So I will put classScope to
instance variable of the metaclass
even when they are not merged with the base class.
This way we always get the following situation
isntance varaible -> instanceScope
class instance variable -> classScope
shared -> classScope + isShared
Let me know what you think since I will implement the following and
write tests.
ah ok. It makes sense to me.
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.