Interestingly, the streaming thing is more natural to me here than the make-array-and-put.
Some people I asked agree, some don't. Seemed to correlate with age, tho… ;P
Best regards
	-Tobias

> On 11.11.2017, at 02:31, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I get what you're saying.  It's not _necessary_ to introduce any
> streaming concepts into this.  Very good point.
> 
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Nicolas Cellier
> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>> But old implementation was a to:do: loop on indices with (self tempAt: i)
>> So we already pay the price of low level procedural style,
>> why having to pay the stream overhead?
>> It makes code more convoluted than necessary (a higher level dsiguise)
>> 
>> Or should we rewrite most of SequenceableCollection protocol?
>> 
>> 2017-11-10 2:55 GMT+01:00 Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>> +1.  #streamContents: is a high-level message.
>>> 
>>> Eliot is a master of C programming, I guess we all see our own style
>>> as less baroque.  I generally try to retain original authors' style
>>> and formatting  as much as possible unless I'm making significant
>>> changes to the method.  I would never only replace someone's
>>> formatting or style with my own.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 11:58 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 08.11.2017, at 02:11, commits at source.squeak.org wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Eliot Miranda uploaded a new version of Kernel to project The Trunk:
>>>>> http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Kernel-eem.1117.mcz
>>>>> 
>>>>> ==================== Summary ====================
>>>>> 
>>>>> Name: Kernel-eem.1117
>>>>> Author: eem
>>>>> Time: 7 November 2017, 5:11:32.043344 pm
>>>>> UUID: 110255e1-5b72-4d99-96bb-e5068c2f5b5b
>>>>> Ancestors: Kernel-tpr.1116
>>>>> 
>>>>> Use a slightly less baroque implemetation for Context>>arguments,
>>>>> equivalent to Pharo's.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> What is baroque about that?
>>>> I'd prefer the other stile any time.
>>>> I especially find the assignment in the "computation" of the argument
>>>> ugly (the n assignment) and potentially confusing.
>>>> 
>>>> I'm a bit puzzled you prefer the style you just put there to the
>>>> streaming constructor…
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards
>>>>        -Tobias
>>>> 
>>>>> =============== Diff against Kernel-tpr.1116 ===============
>>>>> 
>>>>> Item was changed:
>>>>> ----- Method: Context>>arguments (in category 'accessing') -----
>>>>> arguments
>>>>> +     "Answer the receiver's arguments as an Array.
>>>>> +      We could use simply ^(1 to: self numArgs) collect: [:i| self
>>>>> tempAt: i]
>>>>> +      but for performance and minimality we use the implementation
>>>>> below."
>>>>> +     | n args |
>>>>> +     args := Array new: (n := self numArgs).
>>>>> +     1 to: n do: [:i| args at: i put: (self tempAt: i)].
>>>>> +     ^args!
>>>>> -
>>>>> -     ^ Array new: self numArgs streamContents: [:args |
>>>>> -             1 to: self numArgs do: [: i |
>>>>> -                     args nextPut: (self tempAt: i)]]!
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>