[squeak-dev] Re: Seaside support in Squeak (Re: My Own Squeak Direction)

Colin Putney cputney at wiresong.ca
Tue Nov 17 05:44:26 UTC 2009


On 16-Nov-09, at 9:03 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> Colin Putney wrote:
>> On 16-Nov-09, at 5:46 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>> From a practical perspective, I feel quite comfortable with saying  
>>> that Seaside support is a priority to the point that it might be  
>>> driving issues like String/Symbol comparisons, underscores in  
>>> selectors etc. If Cincom, Dolphin, GST, Gemstone and VA support a  
>>> particular feature in Seaside in a particular way, I think we  
>>> should consider it as well.
>> Another practical compatibility issue is literal syntax for  
>> ByteArrays. Just about all the other Smalltalks have it, including  
>> Pharo. I ran into this while trying to update OmniBrowser to the  
>> latest Refactoring code. Any objections to implementing it?
>
> If that's a real issue, knock yourself out. Assuming you mean #[1 2  
> 3] syntax (i.e., no conflict with any existing constructs).

Yup, shouldn't affect existing code. I'll take a stab at it.

Colin



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list