2011/10/1 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
On 1 October 2011 02:24, Henrik Sperre Johansen henrik.s.johansen@veloxit.no wrote:
On 30.09.2011 18:20, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 30 September 2011 18:11, David T. Lewislewis@mail.msen.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2011 at 04:36:43PM +0200, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 30 September 2011 11:42, Lawson Englishlenglish5@cox.net wrote:
Hi. On an Intel Mac running Mac OS X 10.6.8, I followed the instructions to install a NativeBoost VM found here: http://code.google.com/p/nativeboost/wiki/Installation. I downloaded the latest Mac NBCog VM, ??and ran into an error after evaluating NBInstaller install.
I'm using the 4.3alpha-11636.image file. The 4.2 image gives a different set of errors but also wont install:
The progress bar window says: Compiling NativeBoost-Core-IgorStasenko.36
The window title is "Syntax error" with a split text field. The top field contains: nbExternalStructure Fields parsing spec parseFields:byte
The bottom field has a red error message embedded in this line:
?? ?? ?? ??stream peek == #Invalid literal character ->; ifTrue: [ stream next ]. ?? ??].
Help?
I didn't tested an installation in squeak 4.2 images. It looks like there is a change in parser which don't likes the following syntax:
#( a; b ; c)
imo, this is correct syntax. a ';' should be converted to #; symbol.
Squeak 3.6: #( a; b ; c) ==> #(#a #; #b #; #c)
Squeak 3.8: #( a; b ; c) ==> #(#a #; #b #; #c)
Squeak trunk: #( a; b ; c) ==> #(#a #';' #b #';' #c)
PharoCore-1.3-13173: #( a; b ; c) ==> #(#a #';' #b #';' #c)
Dave
ok, then problem is in something else. Lawson, could you please paste the full method source with problematic code?
#; inspect -> Syntax error though...
ps. stream peek == #;
sure it's not a typo and should be stream peek == $; ?
yes its not a typo. Since it is a stream from given array:
#( a ; b ; c ; ) readStream
stream peek at some moment could answer #; symbol.
perhaps i should write it like #';' ? but why it considered invalid?
Ah, all these behaviours were removed from Squeak #; -> #';' #1 -> 1 #$1 -> $1 The rationale was: 1) These were not defined in st80, nor in any formal Smalltalk syntax. # was only for literal symbols or literal arrays. 2) #';' 1 and $1 already are literals, so we don't need any other syntax or additional decoration. 3) This is not portable, no other dialect would accept it. 4) And there were plenty of oddities with doubled # or spaces inserted in between...
Now, Igor you seem to suggest that these extensions would be logical given how the inside of literal array is interpreted, is that it?
Nicolas
Cheers, Henry
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.