[newbie] Complex boolean value?
JArchibald at aol.com
JArchibald at aol.com
Tue Jun 19 08:20:02 UTC 2001
=> 6/19/01 2:36:18 AM EDT, ok at atlas.otago.ac.nz =>
<< Since unary/binary/keyword is not a TRUE description (keyword messages may
be unary and they may be binary), the simple fact that that terminology WAS
used in Smalltalk and IS used by some Smalltalkers does NOT mean that it is
appropriate for all Smalltalkers for all time. >>
Of course it is not appropriate at all times. With a depth of experience and
knowledge about programming languages (which is certainly true of the
Smalltalk community), one can discuss all kinds of interesting comparisons.
However, one does have to get one's terminology straight.
Rightly or wrongly, the terms 'unary', 'binary', and 'keyword' have been
pre-empted by Smalltalk, and are used to desribe the basic message forms. If
one says, "Well, I don't care about that. I want to use 'unary' and 'binary'
with some other meaning," then the interaction must qualify these terms. I
will say 1 + 2 is a "binary message in Smalltalk terms'" or it is a "binary
operator in many other programming languages ... ". In this way, the
discussion is clarified.
To address the above, a keyword message/method can be "binary in the sense of
other programming languages;" this is true when there is only one
parameter/argument. Keyword messages cannot be unary, however, there must be
at least one parameter.
To say that Smalltalk should not have pre-empted these terms is a different
discussion. But to deny that this occurred is just not correct.
Cheers,
Jerry.
____________________________
Jerry L. Archibald
systemObjectivesIncorporated
____________________________
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|