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
|