3.9 underscore still there?
BSchwab at anest.ufl.edu
Mon Oct 30 19:22:58 UTC 2006
My preference would be for ANSI compatibility. With that said, having
underscored in selectors, and even just all but the first slot, would do
almost everying I need. I doubt I use them in variable names, and if I
do, I could change it. If I were to move my production code to Squeak,
I would be editing a lot more than a few variable names. Most of uses
of underscores are matching the outside world, and that is not so
readily altered to suit my whim or Squeak's limitations. If we can get
Ian's fix in the mainstream, it would be greatly appreciated.
"Bill Schwab" <BSchwab at ...> writes:
> Please keep in mind that my most emphatic request is to promote Ian's
> believe) fix, for underscores in all but the first slot in a
> to part of the mainstream release so that it will get maintained as
> compiler evolves. I am not aware that it breaks any code.
That kind of thing would sound great to me. The stable universe
provides a good test for this theory, if anyone wanst to do that test
and lend support to the underscores cause.
By the way, do you only mean selectors, or also variable identifiers?
What would the proposal do about this kind of code?
x_3 "is it x := 3, or the identifier x_3 ?"
> I disagree with your assessment that I am suggesting a change for
That was a typo; indeed, I am the one arguing that we support our
legacy. I am happy to support the ANSI standard if possible, but I
would put the top priority on existing Squeak code.
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
University of Florida
Department of Anesthesiology
PO Box 100254
Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bills at anest4.anest.ufl.edu
Tel: (352) 846-1285
FAX: (352) 392-7029
More information about the Squeak-dev