Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!cbnewsc!lgm
From: lgm@cbnewsc.att.com (lawrence.g.mayka)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: dynamic symbol binding
Summary: Name/object bindings are very useful
Message-ID: <1990Oct2.022007.9376@cbnewsc.att.com>
Date: 2 Oct 90 02:20:07 GMT
References: <1653@seti.inria.fr>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 21

In article <1653@seti.inria.fr>, jml@bdblues.altair.fr (Jean Marie Larcheveque) writes:
> To my knowledge, there is no language which allows you to
> bind a symbol to an object created dynamically.
...
> I am not suggesting that this is useful, and in fact I
> don't think it is, but I am curious to know if this kind of
> thing is possible in any language.

What you are suggesting is a style of programming in which variable
names *refer* to objects instead of *containing* them.  The
abstraction is extremely useful and is synergistic with dynamic typing
(the idea that every object knows its own type during program
execution and behaves only according to the specification of that
type).  Both are found in languages such as Common Lisp and Smalltalk.


	Lawrence G. Mayka
	AT&T Bell Laboratories
	lgm@iexist.att.com

Standard disclaimer.