[OT] Writing a parser for BASIC in Smalltalk/Squeak ? (<CSOTD > included)

Rob Withers rwithers12 at mediaone.net
Thu Jan 10 04:45:56 UTC 2002


At 10:23 PM 1/9/2002, you wrote:

<deliciously snipped>

>I don't care what is actually happening now; my point is that it is
>_wrong_ to have code work in a way that is so absurdly confusing. I can
>see just what the bytecode stream is doing and thus why the answer is
>currently what it is but that just ain't a good excuse. Evidence of past
>foolishness is not evidence for continued foolishness.
>
>Does anyone really think that it is _proper_ that
>| m n  |
>n := 2.
>m := 3.
>n := m + (m := n).
>
>gives a different answer to
>| m n  |
>n := 2.
>m := 3.
>m := n.
>n := m + m.
>??

Oh dear, I hope you aren't going to change the semantics of:

| x y z |
x := 1.
y := 2.
z := 3.
x := x + y;
         + (x := z).
self sqAssert: (x == 4)

My vote is with Bijan, it's EVIL!  But, I wouldn't go running and make it a 
syntax error, just yet, unless we were speaking about removing 
assignment!   Were we?

rob






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list