Once more, while I appreciate the proposals to compress the syntax of 
specific frequently needed messages, I don't think that their value 
outweighs the value of the simplicity and power of the original 
Smalltalk syntax. I would much prefer leaving it without any 
extensions, including dots, etc. Think of APL, hieroglyphics versus 
the 26 letters of the English alphabet, etc.


Date forwarded: 	21 Mar 1999 14:00:35 -0000
Date sent:      	Sun, 21 Mar 1999 14:59:43 +0100
To:             	squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
From:           	Stefan Matthias Aust <sma at mail.netsurf.de>
Subject:        	[ENH] That crazy dot idea II
Forwarded by:   	squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
Send reply to:  	squeak at cs.uiuc.edu

> Hi!
> 
> What do you think about using [ ] as an alternative to #at: and #at:put:?  
> 
> After refactoring the DotParser's messagePart:repeat: mega-method [1] if
> was trivial to implement.  This extension to the Smalltalk grammar should
> break any correct programs.  I find it quite useful.  Using "a[12] := a[12]
> + 1" instead of "a at: 12 put: (a at: 12) + 1" is easier to read IMHO.
> 
> Try yourself!
> 
> Attached is a new version of DotTest*.cs you can filein after applying the
> ParserPatch*.cs file.
> 
> 
> [1] note to SqueakCentral: If you like, I'd be glad to provide also a
>     patch for the original Parser class or for a parser with just the
>     []- but without .-access.
> 
> bye



Ivan Tomek,

Jodrey School of Computer Science
Acadia University
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.
Go Smalltalk.