🚀 go-pugleaf

pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) wrote:
>
> >>> On Mon, 23 Oct 1995 15:44:42 GMT, shang@corp.mot.com (David
> >>> L. Shang) said:

> David> therefore, "this" and "super" are different objects.
> 
> No, no, no, no. I read on page 37 of "A little Smalltalk", a slim
> introductory level textbook by T. Budd:
> 
>   "Both the [pseudo] variables 'self' and 'super' refer to the
>   receiver of the current message. When a message is passed to
>   'self' the search for a method [ ... ] On the other hand, when a
>   messag eis passed to 'super', the search begins with [ ... ]'
> 
> In other words, in Smalltalk 'self == super' is true by definition, and
> it is only method lookup that differs. The different behaviour is
> possible because the Smalltalk compiler understands 'self' and 'super'
> to be pseudo-variables, and thus treats them specially.
> 
>...
> 
> BTW, you are the second person in a day to display a gross
> misunderstanding of Smalltalk fundamentals -- and this is not by chance,
> or your fault alone. One of the big problems with Smalltalk is the
> extremely misleading termonology used therein, e.g. 'message' for
> 'procedure' and 'sending' for 'calling'. As D. Hopwood reminded me once,
> no amount of pithy verbiage will remedy conceptual pitfalls, but I can
> try :-), even with languages where the terminology does mislead.

This seems to be one of the biggest stumbling blocks for new Smalltalk 
programmers.  It's well worth the extra time it takes to get it 
straight!