[bug] 1 instVarAt: 1 put: 1.
John M McIntosh
johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Thu Aug 14 04:48:58 UTC 2003
On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 03:16 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While we can consider this a bug, it is certainly the case that you
> should
> ask an object about its instSize before attempting this. E.g.,
>
> Object instSize => 0 "no instVars"
> Point instSize => 2 "two instVars"
I'm not sure I agree with that, it's like asking an array for it's size
and verifying the index value of the
at: or at:put: you are doing. We don't do that and rely on the fact
that an boundary check will occur.
Same thing should happen here. Either throw the
errorSubscriptBounds: index
"Create an error notification that an improper integer was used as an
index."
or the
self error: (self class name) , 's are not indexable'
based on the primitive failure recovery code, much like in Object>at:
--
========================================================================
===
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd. http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
========================================================================
===
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|