Getting double semi as sequencer harvested.

Jason Johnson jason.johnson.081 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 4 16:10:58 UTC 2007


On 9/4/07, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>
> I'm of a similar opinion.
>
> They're not pipes. It's a pointless bit of syntactic flummery (and
> not even saving any keystrokes!) that accesses no new semantics and
> actually looks *worse* than the thing it is supposed to improve. It
> is nothing whatsoever to do with functional programming.  Daft.
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Useful random insult:- One clown short of a circus.

Lol.  I hope you never leave this list, such directness in our PR
times is quite refreshing. :)

But I think you might be looking at the OP's examples.  Vassili's blog
[1] had some better examples like:

somethings thingsAt: aKey :> includes: aThing :>
    ifTrue: [...]
    ifFalse [...]

Though for me it's not vastly better then:

((somethings thingsAt: aKey)
   includes: aThing)
     ifTrue: [...]
     ifFalse: [...]

But it does make you backtrack a bit to type it (well, at least
highlight the exp and type a ( ).

The obvious counter argument is: is this going to make it less obvious
when some code should be refactored ala "Smalltalk Best Practice
Patterns".

[1] http://blog.3plus4.org/2007/08/30/message-chains/.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list