[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Help-smalltalk] Re: criticism of the new syntax
From: |
Stephen Compall |
Subject: |
[Help-smalltalk] Re: criticism of the new syntax |
Date: |
Sat, 22 Dec 2007 02:14:57 +0000 |
On Fri, 2007-12-21 at 10:20 +0600, Ildar Mulyukov wrote:
> It's better to be named methodsCategory: or methodsWithCategory:
Even better would be to look at the code for STInST.GSTParser and work
out a way that the kinds of top-level blocks can be extended, perhaps
based on message name, as they all parse as RBVariableNodes or
RBMessageNodes.
That way you could experiment with different kinds of top-level blocks
without altering the core or even GNU Smalltalk at all.
I have thought about how best to provide this modularly but haven't come
up with anything good.
--
Our last-ditch plan is to change the forums into a podcast, then send
RSS feeds into the blogosphere so our users can further debate the
legality of mashups amongst this month's 20 'sexiest' gadgets.
--Richard "Lowtax" Kyanka
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
- Re: [Help-smalltalk] criticism of the new syntax, (continued)
- Message not available
Re: [Help-smalltalk] criticism of the new syntax, agonyzhou, 2007/12/19