On 21 août 06, at 14:47, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

> stéphane ducasse schrieb:
>> Bert
>> do I understand correctly that you could then do the same
>>>     showOptions
>>>         <on: fire in: optionButton>
>>>         optionDialog open
>>>
>> with     <on: #fire in: #optionButton>
>> since this is the interpretation of the symbols that give them  
>> semantics.
>> ie mapping optionButton to a field.
>
> If you insist on using "pragma syntax", yes.

I do not insist, I just want to understand :)

> In Andreas' method property implementation, this annotation indeed  
> adds a property named #on:in: with the value #(#fire #optionButton).
>
> However, the missing # in the in: part indicates that this is *not*  
> any arbitrary symbol, whereas the event name is.

Ok do you mean that I cannot put #zork but this is an event name.

> So for ultimate consistency it would need to be written as
>
> 	<on: #fire in: optionButton>
>
> However, this would add a bit of visual clutter. And, it would look  
> like you could use a literal other than a Symbol for the event  
> name. So the #  is implied just like in a literal array.

Ok so this means that basically there would not too much change to  
get something consistent with pragmas if we want.

Stef
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>