#xor: is on the same plane as #| and #& - evaluate both sides and applyWe also have #and: and #or: - evaluate receiver, and evaluate argument block if and only if necessary.I use #and: and #or: for speed purposes - and to avoid side effects (sometimes).I'm just curious - is there an equivalent symbol for xor similar to | and & that we could use?Also, before making this change to using blocks (if we do), we'd need to fix all users - probably also in the VMMaker packages.-cbcOn Fri, Feb 9, 2018 at 9:18 AM, Levente Uzonyi <leves@caesar.elte.hu> wrote:Performance. Two fold: you create a block for no reason, because it will always be evaluated right after its creation.On Fri, 9 Feb 2018, marcel.taeumel wrote:
commits-2 wrote
A new version of Kernel was added to project The Inbox:
http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Kernel-fn.1151.mcz
==================== Summary ====================
Name: Kernel-fn.1151
Author: fn
Time: 9 February 2018, 12:32:25.516883 pm
UUID: 9fb7df4b-6bf4-4af8-9c75-7496c2f0b517
Ancestors: Kernel-tonyg.1150
For consistency: allow blocks to be passed into #xor: (see #or: and
#and:).
=============== Diff against Kernel-tonyg.1150 ===============
Item was changed:
----- Method: False>>xor: (in category 'logical operations') -----
+ xor: alternativeBlock
- xor: aBoolean
"Posted by Eliot Miranda to squeak-dev on 3/24/2009"
+ ^alternativeBlock value!
- ^aBoolean!
Item was changed:
----- Method: True>>xor: (in category 'logical operations') -----
+ xor: alternativeBlock
- xor: aBoolean
"Posted by Eliot Miranda to squeak-dev on 3/24/2009"
+ ^alternativeBlock value not!
- ^aBoolean not!
Hey Nicolas,
it seems that you had the intention to not allow "a xor: [b]" because,
obviously, one does always have to check both operands for XOR. Yet, would
it do any harm if we would allow "a xor: [b]"?
If there is no block, #value still has to be sent.
Levente