[PEAK] Re: trellis.Set.discard

[Sergey Schetinin]

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 04:30, Sergey Schetinin <maluke at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hm.  ISTM that this is a bug in Component creation, in that it should push
>>> and restore read-onlyness.  The make() should be idempotent with respect to
>>> the @compute rule.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it's not *quite* that simple.  What's really needed is to
>> allow changes to cells even during "read-only" periods, as long as they are
>> "new".
>
> Wow.. I don't really understand why this is needed, but wouldn't it
> also open a possibility for bugs where some read-only rules change a
> new cell when they shouldn't? Like performer changing an attribute of
> a component acquired from @make, it wouldn't get caught the first time
> around, right?

Oh, wait, it wouldn't, because the "new cells" set wouldn't include
the attr at that point, because of the push-pop mechanism you've
described...