On 04/09/07, Jason Johnson <jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/07, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn at stonehenge.com> wrote:
> > >>>>> "Jason" == Jason Johnson <jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com> writes:
> >
> > I just don't like version creep in languages.  Smalltalk has remained
> > relatively stable for nearly 3 decades.  Anything to disrupt that has got to
> > meet a pretty high standard for me personally.
>
> Fair enough.  I do agree with the sentiment that when things stop
> advancing they start decaying, but in very simple/elegant languages
> like Smalltalk or Lisp we can advance in the libraries without syntax
> change.  Adding syntax can make things easier but it's not for free,
> it's a cost of added complexity.
>
> But if we must go with this thing then I would prefer the one in
> Vassili's log.  That was the best argument and usage for this I have
> seen yet, not to mention much more clear (to me) then the ;;.
>
> Oh, but I like the :> better then :).  Maybe the best would be ->
>
>

Ohh.. there is many variants. like
|>
|=
|-
|)
||
|]
|.

But best, i think we can use double period.
..

a msg: param1 .. msg2: param2 .. msg: param3 .. fooz: buzz .. fee: buckz

Code looks nice and elegant :)

-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.