Jan

Are your falling blocks unique? Is there a reason you are putting them into a Set instead of some other collection?

One of the hidden features of Squeak/Smalltalk is that stack like collections exist. Because OrderedCollections have both a add/removeFirst and add/removeLast methods they can easily act like a stack or a queue. If you want to loop thru a queue of falling bricks just remove each brick and replace the still falling ones at the end. No?

A Set would only be useful if you are mapping many of something onto one of the same something and you have a lot of different somethings. That doesn't sound like what you are doing.

If you have a method called say #falling which when sent to a brick causes it to fall and return true or causes it to not fall and return false then a simple:

bricks := (1 to: 100) collect: [:each | Brick new ].

bricks := bricks asOrderedCollection . "Optional"

bricks := bricks select: #falling.

the above is short for

bricks := bricks select: [:each | each falling ] .

would have each brick do its thing and store the list of still falling bricks in the variable.

Yours in curiosity and service, Jerome Peace