> El 13 feb 2021, a las 9:46, Tim Mackinnon <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
> I never thought of that implication - if ivars are proper objects (is that now applied?) would this issue go away (an ivar would just get a new parent)?
>
> This is a very interesting problem, as its a type of transaction, and I never though of it that way - its easy to think of it as just dumb code - but in effect it isn’t.
>
> Tim
>
> On Fri, 12 Feb 2021, at 4:30 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:
>> Wonderful to have progress on this important topic - thank you!
>>
>> Sorry I haven't been following closely (maybe you addressed it already), but
>> pushing up instance variables has a dangerous limitation - instances lose
>> any data held in that var. I guess it's because it's deleted from the
>> subclass prior to adding to the superclass to avoid duplicating. One
>> solution would be to add a var to the superclass with a mangled name, copy
>> the data for all instances, remove the var from the subclass, and then
>> rename the mangled var.
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> Cheers,
>> Sean
>> --
>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
>>