[ENH] UpArrow as operator
ivan.tomek at acadiau.ca
Thu Mar 18 15:44:15 UTC 1999
What I had in mind was a situation where a method needs to
communicate repeatedly with the sender before completion. As far as I
know, this requires the sender to be included as an argument of the
method, or the use of thisContext as in
thisContext sender receiver
My question was whether a special variable such as sender would be
useful to make this unnecessary.
Date forwarded: 18 Mar 1999 14:05:13 -0000
From: "Peter Crowther" <peter.crowther at it-iq.com>
To: <squeak at cs.uiuc.edu>
Subject: RE: [ENH] UpArrow as operator
Date sent: Thu, 18 Mar 1999 13:57:44 -0000
Forwarded by: squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
Send reply to: squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> > As things are, callbacks require awkward solutions
> > which don't seem to be necessary as the information already is
> > available.
> Blocks are about the most elegant and encapsulated solution for callbacks
> I've ever encountered:
> doSomethingSneakyAndCallBack: aBlock
> self doSomethingSneaky.
> aBlock value
> ... why do we need any other solution?
> - Peter
Jodrey School of Computer Science
Nova Scotia, Canada
fax: (902) 585-1067
voice: (902) 585-1467
Life would be so much easier if we could just look at the source code.
More information about the Squeak-dev