Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
TIA.
/Klaus
On Nov 27, 2008, at 4:55 AM, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
In Squeak, this returns the receiver, an instance of MyClass.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
In Squeak, this returns nil.
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
TIA.
/Klaus
-- "If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it". Albert Einstein
2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel klaus.witzel@cobss.com:
Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything. i'd rather test following:
^ [42] value vs ^ [42 . ] value
A period is designating an end of expression , right? For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
TIA.
/Klaus
-- "If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it". Albert Einstein
On 27.11.2008, at 15:40, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel klaus.witzel@cobss.com:
Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything. i'd rather test following:
^ [42] value vs ^ [42 . ] value
A period is designating an end of expression , right? For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
Because the . after the final statement in a block or method is optional.
- Bert -
On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 15:48:33 +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 27.11.2008, at 15:40, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel :
Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything. i'd rather test following:
^ [42] value vs ^ [42 . ] value
A period is designating an end of expression , right? For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
Because the . after the final statement in a block or method is optional.
Thank you Bert, James and Igor :) Now it's clear what the test has to be about.
- Bert -
2008/11/27 Bert Freudenberg bert@freudenbergs.de:
On 27.11.2008, at 15:40, Igor Stasenko wrote:
2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel klaus.witzel@cobss.com:
Quick, what does this method return:
MyClass>>myMethod.
and what does this method's block return:
MyClass>>myBlock
^[.]value
I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these two cases as well.
mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything. i'd rather test following:
^ [42] value vs ^ [42 . ] value
A period is designating an end of expression , right? For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
Because the . after the final statement in a block or method is optional.
in squeak, they not just simply optional, you can, as TRUE writer leave an ellipsises [42 ...] value to let readers feel the taste of your novel style :)
- Bert -
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org