[Grace-core] minigrace oddness

[Andrew P. Black]

On 30 Jun 2014, at 2:19, James Noble <kjx at ecs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote:

> But this means that the syntatic form of a message request "myname.foo"
> *isn't* a "normal" request when myname is one of these nested names,
> it has to have the semantics of an "outer" request.    
> That's confusing (although a further syntax would be to force people to write 
> outer(myname) or outer.myname which have the virtue of not looking like
> normal method requests

Why isn’t an outer request a “normal” method request?

I would be willing to talk about changing th emending of outer from “the enclosing object” to “the closest enclosing lexical scope that contains the referenced property”, which I think is what Kim is asking for.    Do we understand all of the consequences?

	Andrew