On 05/09/07, Blake <blake at kingdomrpg.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 10:19:52 -0700, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>
> > Gronk? What is clunky about a uniform, consistent syntax that has us
> > a) name the recipient
> > b) name the message to send to it
> > c) name any parameters to include with the message
> > Having a special case that lets you leave out the recipient if it is
> > 'self' would be clunky, confusing and tasteless.
>
> What's the point of having a context if you don't use it?
>
>         self position: (self position + newPos - self center) asIntegerPoint.
>
> versus:
>
>         position: (position + newPos - center) asIntegerPoint
>
> Yes. I see how that's not only clunky and confusing BUT tasteless. Worse
> than combining plaid with stripes.
>
> :-P~~~~~
>
> Here's another horrid example from the Wiki entry on the abomination known
> as "Self":
>
>         valid: base bottom between: ligature bottom + height And: base top /
> scale factor.
>
> and here we see the oh-so-elegant improvements ST-80 makes:
>
>         valid := self base bottom between: self ligature bottom + self height
> and: self base top / self scale factor.
>
> Mmmmmm. =Tasteful=!
>
None of the above seem tasteful to me :)
But IMHO smalltalk example easier to read, because you don't need to
watch for case of first letter in message selector..

>
>
>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.