2009/8/2 Randal L. Schwartz merlyn@stonehenge.com:
"Bert" == Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de writes:
Bert> Commment ∉ Literals
Yes, I understand that.
To put the data into a comment means some magic has to happen to parse source text to get at the value.
To put the data into a literal means I simply call the method to get the value.
What's the downside of having it as a literal?
the downside is, that data you holding in a literal is not exactly what you want it to be. And often it needs some additional steps(convesion) to be useful. So, since you anyways needing a conversion , converting from a literal or from a method source code doesn't makes much difference, except that if you keep it in literal - it will add a data bloat to an .image.
I know the downside of having it as a comment: far more mechanism, and thus, more fragile code and maintenance.
-- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 merlyn@stonehenge.com URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/ Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion