How about Smalltalk-2000?

Jarvis, Robert P. (Contingent) Jarvisb at timken.com
Wed Feb 16 20:49:29 UTC 2000


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Warren Postma [SMTP:wpostma at ztr.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, February 16, 2000 3:37 PM
> To:	'tim at sumeru.stanford.edu'
> Subject:	RE: How about Smalltalk-2000?
> 
> <to be taken with a grain of salt>
> 
> 
> >Who needs 'operators'. Stick to sending messages; Smalltalk has two
> >operators, assign and return (have I missed any?) and that is quite
> enough.
> 
> What about 
> 
> 5+2 
> 
> What the heck is that? A fixed non-object oriented use of an algebraic
> idiom, supported non-extensibly by hardcoded stuff in the VM and parser.
> 
> 
5 + 2 is a binary message send.  5 is the receiver.  '+' is the message.  2
is the argument.  It's quite object oriented, and it's quite extensible.
There's all kinds of binary messages: #+, #-, #/, #*, and #@ come
immediately to mind

Bob Jarvis
Compuware @ Timken





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list