On Friday 17 October 2003 3:20 am, Peter van Rooijen wrote:
> x_y z would only be problematic if all three of x, y, and x_y were in
> scope, right? Otherwise, there would be no ambiguity. So, only in the
> particular circumstance of all three names being in scope, would one need
> to
> disambiguate by either putting whitespace next to the _ or, alternatively,
> use := for the assignment. In all other cases, there is no ambiguity
> anyway.
>
> In view of the fact that existing Squeak code can't use identifiers with
> underscores in them, it seems to me that _all_ existing code would still be
> valid if underscores in identifiers would be allowed from now on.
>
> And in new code, those who like to assign with underscores with no
> whitespace around them, can even continue doing so, as long as they don't
> have x, y, and x_y in scope, which might well mean that they will never
> write an unintended ambiguity in their entire careers. Should it happen
> anyway, a simple space will suffice to clear things up.

It's not just a matter of new code. It is possible that a re-compilation of 
old code would happen.

-- 
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE