On Aug 25, 2007, at 8:40 PM, Jason Johnson wrote:

> This is a bit contrived.  If you ever did find the need to do this it
> should look like:
>
>
> (((((((((((obj message1: param)
>   message2:param)
>     message1: param)
>       message2:param)
>         message1: param)
>           message2:param)
>             message1: param)
>               message2:param)
>                 message1: param)
>                   message2:param)
>                     message1: param)
>                       message2:param
>
> Code smell to be sure, but you pile what you don't like on one line
> and say you can't read it while formatting what you do like and saying
> "see!".

To me there is not much difference between ...
> (((((((((((obj message1: param)
>   message2:param)
>     message1: param)
>       message2:param)
>         message1: param)
>           message2:param)
>             message1: param)
>               message2:param)
>                 message1: param)
>                   message2:param)
>                     message1: param)
>                       message2:param

and

> (((((((((((obj message1: param) message2:param) message1: param)  
> message2:param) message1: param) message2:param) message1: param)  
> essage2:param) message1: param) message2:param) message1: param)  
> message2:param

1. They both suck ...
2. While writing and thinking ... I have always to stop and think ...  
"ok, now where do I need to put the bloody parenthesis"


>
>> The pipe is needed to support a pipe&filter style of programming.  
>> That
>> perfectly works with Smalltalk syntax, and truly
>> opens up a better way of doing functional transformations.
>
> pipe&filter style of programming?  Most people call this "functional
> programming" and it doesn't require a pipe operator to work.  Such an
> operator can make certain code cleaner to be sure, but it doesn't
> "open up a better way of doing functional transforms" by any means.
> Just saves you one character per function call.


I call it too functional programming ... but there are many  
definitions of it ...
for somebody functional programming is no side-effects and nothing else,
for others higher order functions is ok ...

since I didn't want to get into that, I just said pipe&filters ... i  
thought it was alright ... thanks for this clarification ... now  
everybody now we are talking about ...

> Such an operator can make certain code cleaner to be sure, but it  
> doesn't
> "open up a better way of doing functional transforms" by any means.
> Just saves you one character per function call.

Not only it can make " certain code cleaner" , but It changes the way  
you think, because it's like the full stop in regular English ...

Simple train of thought example ...

----
 >>here I'm Thinking<<
here I'm doing
----


 >>ok so what do I have to do ... first get I get some objects<<<

storage getSomeObject >> than .... (and I put my pipe symbol ) ...  
put a PIPE <<
            |

Already here it cool ...I don't have to ... think .. "Gee I need to  
go back and put a parenthesis .."

........

storage   getSomeCollection >> than .... aaaaand PIPE <<
               | filter: [:obj | obj creationDate >10]     >>>>> some  
more mumble mumble .... aaaaaand PIPE<<
               | collect: [:obj | obj.name]        >>>>  some more  
mumble mumble .... and PIPE <<
 >> .... her some more mumble mumble .... because I'm not sure what  
to do BUT
I do know that I've got some names.... I never need to go back and  
put parenthesis .. and this does not break my thoughts ....<<<<

......

storage   getSomeCollection >>> than .... (and I put my pipe symbol )  
<<<
               | filter: [:obj | obj creationDate >10]     >>>>>  
than .... (and I put my pipe symbol )... and PIPE <<
               | collect: [:obj | obj.name]        >>>>than .... (and  
I put my pipe symbol )... and PIPE<<
               | filter: [:name | name isFemale ]
               | filter: [:name | beutifullGirlsDB contains:name ]
               | do: [:name | mailTo: (beutifullGirlsDB  
getWithName:name) message: "What are you doing tonight ?" ]
 >>>mmm ... I could do a few things better ... filter and collect  
less ... so I'll do another pass ....
At this point I might write a Unit test and later I'll make it  
faster ...
  etc etc ....<<<

---------------------------------

To me it's like a full stop in english. Maybe you are different. But  
I think that most people like full stops when a sentence ends.


The pipe is the full stop ... ready to start the next manipulation ...





Fabio Filasieno





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20070825/ce564d3d/attachment.htm