Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!jussieu.fr!oleane!pipex!bnr.co.uk!bcarh8ac.bnr.ca!bcarh189.bnr.ca!nott!cunews!tina.mrco.carleton.ca!knight
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: A Question about Blocks
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: tina.mrco.carleton.ca
Message-ID: <knight.802213518@tina.mrco.carleton.ca>
Sender: news@cunews.carleton.ca (News Administrator)
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: The Object People
References: <D9Fw8C.IGA@lut.ac.uk>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 1995 21:05:18 GMT
Lines: 16

In <D9Fw8C.IGA@lut.ac.uk> M.Ireland@lut.ac.uk (M Ireland) writes:

>Smalltalk is supposedly a pure object-oriented language and I
>agree with this, but where do blocks fit in? Blocks are Objects
>in their own right (like everything in ST) but have access to
>the variables of the Class in which they were defined. How are
>these two ideas reconciled?

Hmmm. How about if we do a substitution here, replacing "Blocks" with
"Compiled methods".

-- 
 Alan Knight                | The Object People
 knight@acm.org             | Smalltalk and OO Training and Consulting
 alan_knight@mindlink.bc.ca | 509-885 Meadowlands Dr.
 +1 613 225 8812            | Ottawa, Canada, K2C 3N2
