On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 2:55 AM Thiede, Christoph <
Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:

> Hi Marcel,
>
> as I see it, this Blocks check only restricts the possible hits, so
> removing it should not damage any existing functionality. (I am *not*
> talking about modifying Dangerous!)
>
> And if you do
>
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). [:x | Smalltalk saveSession.
> false]}.#()} "pls don't run this!"
>
> you will surely expect the side effects to be executed?
>

If MethodFinder were implemented using simulation (a la Context
class>>runSimulated:) then we could implement a proper sandbox and
completely discard Dangerous.  We could catch any attempt to change the
class hierarchy, save a snapshot, etc.

> > Just curious: what would be the block example for these examples?
>
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #even}. #(1)}. *'(data1 reject: data2)
> '*
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #yourself descending}. #(2 1)}. *'(data1
> sorted: data2) (data1 sort: data2) '*
>
> Hey, maybe we should make a small game of it? :-) GuessTheSelectorGame :D
>
> Christoph
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *Von:* Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im
> Auftrag von Taeumel, Marcel
> *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 16. Oktober 2019 10:54 Uhr
> *An:* gettimothy via Squeak-dev; squeak-dev at mail.squeak.org
> *Betreff:* Re: [squeak-dev] MethodFinder.Blocks
>
> Hi, Christoph.
>
> The method finder (or selector browser) has a hard-coded list of possible
> results (or messages) to not trigger dangerous side effects. Any new
> feature, such as that "quasi higher-order-message" symbol , would have to
> be added. Sure. But keep compatiblility with block arguments. :-)
>
> Just curious: what would be the block example for these examples?
>
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #even}. #(1)}
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #yourself descending}. #(2 1)}.
>
> Especially the latter seems kind of cryptic to me.
>
> Best,
> Marcel
>
> Am 14.10.2019 01:27:12 schrieb Thiede, Christoph <
> christoph.thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de>:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
> I just got irritated as I evaluated
>
>
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #even}. #(1)}
>
>
> and got no hit.
>
> This is because the MethodFinder stores an extra list of selector
> parameters that are assumed to require a block argument (Blocks) -- but
> nowadays this requirement is not given, as you can pass a Symbol,
> MessageSend, SortFunction or whatsoever, thanks to polymorphy. So (how) is
> this block check still relevant? If I remove it, I get the right hit and
> can do thinks like
>
>
> MethodFinder methodFor: {{#(1 2). #yourself descending}. #(2 1)}.
>
>
> Also, #ifError: will prevent any error thrown if the block does not match
> the selector.
>
>
> Looking forward to your answers :)
>
> Christoph
>
>
>

-- 
_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20191017/451bd13d/attachment.html>