Hi Dimitris,

nil **is** an object. A normal object.

From your wikipedia quote:��The��true,��false, and��nil��pseudo-variables are��singleton��instances.

You can try many things to try to convince yourself:

�� - nil class => UndefinedObject

�� -��nil sizeInMemory => 8 (2 object headers, no instance variables)

You can also take a look at the bootstrap and see how it is created.

And it may make sense to have the same inspection tabs as any other normal object that has no instance variables.

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 11:14 AM, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:

looks like wikipedia agrees with me, but I have to confess never looked at the Pharo implementation so I may still be wrong

"Smalltalk-80��syntax is rather minimalist, based on only a handful of declarations and reserved words. In fact, only six "keywords" are reserved in Smalltalk:��true,��false,��nil,��self,��super, and��thisContext. These are actually called��pseudo-variables, identifiers that follow the rules for variable identifiers but denote bindings that the programmer cannot change. The��true,��false, and��nil��pseudo-variables are��singleton��instances.��self��and��super��refer to the receiver of a message within a method activated in response to that message, but sends to��super��are looked up in the superclass of the method's defining class rather than the class of the receiver, which allows methods in subclasses to invoke methods of the same name in superclasses.��thisContext��refers to the current activation record. The only built-in language constructs are message sends, assignment, method return and literal syntax for some objects. From its origins as a language for children of all ages, standard Smalltalk syntax uses punctuation in a manner more like English than mainstream coding languages. The remainder of the language, including control structures for conditional evaluation and iteration, is implemented on top of the built-in constructs by the standard Smalltalk class library. (For performance reasons, implementations may recognize and treat as special some of those messages; however, this is only an optimization and is not hardwired into the language syntax.)"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smalltalk

Or maybe there is more here tha meets the eye ?

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 12:10 PM Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:

is it ? I always thought it was just one of those things that is not an object , together with super and self. I vaguelly remember that 5-6 words in Smalltalk are not objects.��

If it is an actual object and not something else wrapped in a very thin object, I can see the reason for inspection. Otherwise I cannot say I see it.��

On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 10:45 AM Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk@gmail.com> wrote:

But it is not nothing. It is real object.

2017-11-23 9:03 GMT+01:00 Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios@gmail.com>:

Personally I love it

��what you find when you search for nothing ?

Nothing��

:D��

On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:23 PM Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:

Indeed I do not really like the blank window.��

On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 10:18 PM, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:

Ah OK, it's expected then?

I find that surprising, because I could maybe want to look at meta side like I can for other elementary objects:

2017-11-18 22:03 GMT+01:00 Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel@gmail.com>:

Yes

Cheers,

Alex

On 18 November 2017 at 21:56, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:

Anyone tried 'nil inspect' recently?

--

������

Guille Polito Research Engineer Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille CRIStAL - UMR 9189 French National Center for Scientific Research - http://www.cnrs.fr Web: http://guillep.github.io Phone: +33 06 52 70 66 13