On Mon, 24 Feb 2014, J. Vuletich (mail lists) wrote:

Quoting tim Rowledge <tim@rowledge.org>:

On 24-02-2014, at 10:52 AM, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:

Though being reserved for return statements, the upArrow ^ could perfectly be accepted as a character composing a binary selector, like the verticalBar | already is.

[snip]

What do you think?

I think that it would be a massive cognitive overload when reading code. The return signifier needs to be a unique artefact, whatever it is.

foo bar blah ^ ribbet factorial

Quick - is that correct code or should there be a ‘.’ in front of the ^ ? Will it crash the spaceship?

I wish we still had a proper up arrow rather than a caret, not to mention the proper left arrow assign instead of the nonsensical Pascal :=.

StrikeFont allInstancesDo: [ :each | each useLeftArrow ]

That solves the problem, but it makes another. We lose underscore character with that change. :)


Levente

:)

tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
If you think C++ is not overly complicated, just what is a protected abstract virtual base pure virtual private destructor and when was the last time you needed one? -- Tom Cargin

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich