At 19:34 21.02.2001 -0500, Sven <sven at dcs.uconn.edu> wrote:
>Also wondered if there was any reason that caseOf: and caseOf:
>aBlockAssociationCollection otherwise: aBlock methods had duplicate
>examples at the bottom?

But they are subtly different -- let's look at #caseOf:'s examples:

| z | z _ {[#a]->[1+1]. ['b' asSymbol]->[2+2]. [#c]->[3+3]}. #b caseOf: z

| z | z _ {[#a]->[1+1]. ['d' asSymbol]->[2+2]. [#c]->[3+3]}. #b caseOf: z
                          "^here"

And the second set actually says "The following are compiled in-line:"

#b caseOf: {[#a]->[1+1]. ['b' asSymbol]->[2+2]. [#c]->[3+3]}

#b caseOf: {[#a]->[1+1]. ['d' asSymbol]->[2+2]. [#c]->[3+3]}

You can observe the difference by pasting one of each group in turn as the 
body of, say, method foo of class False, and doing a "show bytecodes" in 
the browser.

BTW:  Because of said code inlining, make sure to use "method source 
containing it" from the browser's shifted menu to actually see the "call" 
sites in the Squeak image.

Whether #caseOf: is desirable at all, I can't tell.

HTH,
Helge