OperationalHi,
Yes, who need operators!!
I think to explain smalltalk it would be sometimes easyer to even omit
the assingment operator. The way Self does it would probably make people
think harder about what they're trying to express and thus produce better
code.
> 
> 
> Warren Postma wrote:
> 
> > [ I don't like this entirely because Python already has a nice VM to
> run in
> > (the JVM) and the JVM is already more widely ported than the Smalltalk
> VM.
> Really? I suspect that you'll find Squeak alone is on more platforms
> than java; let alone other assorted Smalltalks.
> 
> [snip]
> > Voila, Smalltalk-2000, a dialect of Smalltalk-80 that acknowledges
> that
> > Smalltalk has finally developed an alternative to the most unreadable
> part
> > of Smalltalk-80 syntax.
> Not meaning to be insulting to you personally, but <yuck>! 'operators'?
> Who needs 'operators'. Stick to sending messages; Smalltalk has two
> operators, assign and return (have I missed any?) and that is quite
> enough.
> 
> tim
Yes, I think you forgot two, Sequencing (the dot operator) which could
easyly made a message but AFAIK now isn't. And the kaskade (the semicolon
operator), I don't see an obvious message replacement here. The solution would be
a makro expansion with a new temp -- probably easier for beginners.


messaged bye,
Torge

-- 
Sent through Global Message Exchange - http://www.gmx.net