Case-insensitive selectors
Patrick Logan
patrickl at servio.gemstone.com
Tue Jan 27 23:52:00 UTC 1998
From my point of view (I am _not_ one of the "original" smalltalk
designers) it's just the other way around. In a static language
you have all the time you need for compiling and linking and doing
case insensitive comparisons. Smalltalk, however, does lots of
things with its selectors. You can "perform:" them which is in
basically a lookup of the signature. In principle, this happens
every time a message is sent. I'd say if the method lookup takes
longer for case-insensitive comparisons this a very good reason to
stay case insensitive.
I am not advocating for case-insensitity but in response to the
message above, if one were to adopt this policy:
(1) It would seem to me selectors could be replaced by all upper- or
lower-case selectors at compile (i.e. "accept") time. Then all lookups
would be canonical.
(2) Common Lisp and other Lisps are case-insensitive and work fine in
an interactive environment. Its syntax is more suited though since it
can easily use - as a separator rather than _ which requires a <shift>
key.
(3) WithoutASeparatorLike_or-IdGuessMostPeopleWouldStillTypeLikeThis
--
Patrick Logan mailto:patrickl at gemstone.com
Voice 503-533-3365 Fax 503-629-8556
Gemstone Systems, Inc http://www.gemstone.com
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|