Newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!MathWorks.Com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!swiss.ans.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!sgiblab!a2i!158.rahul.net!user
From: Craig.Latta@NetJam.ORG (Craig Latta)
Subject: Re: Curious bug in most versions of Smalltalk
Message-ID: <Craig.Latta-270994102549@158.rahul.net>
Followup-To: comp.lang.smalltalk
Sender: news@rahul.net (Usenet News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: 158.rahul.net
Organization: The NetJam Group
References: <170323Z23091994@anon.penet.fi>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 1994 18:25:49 GMT
Lines: 23


	Steve Burbeck <sburbeck@ksccary.com> writes:

> Here is an interesting and probably rarely encountered bug that seems to
> bedevil nearly every implementation of Smalltalk: super isn't handled
> very gracefully when encountered in a method in Object.  The failure
> modes are varied and interesting.	

	He then illustrates with several amusing examples from various Smalltalk
implementations, via an Object>>testSuperSend:

> testSuperSend
>     "^Object new testSuperSend"
>     ^super species

	Shouldn't the answer be UndefinedObject? The superclass of Object is nil.
The species of nil is its class, UndefinedObject.


-C

Craig Latta <Craig.Latta@NetJam.ORG> -- "Instant monotony! Just ad
nauseum."
