htylim at gmail.com
Wed Jan 2 16:43:40 UTC 2008
Just as food for thought take into account that just silently ignoring what
there is past the return statement is error-prone. That is why my opinion
would be to be explicit in what you want to do and use comments.
What I think a nice change would be is to allow comments inside comments
(that is, to only take into account the first and last ' " ' and accept
everything that is inside). Maybe comments could be allowed past return
On Jan 2, 2008 1:47 PM, Keith Hodges <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Interesting that current compiler barfs on code past the return
> > statement, saying that there's nothing expected after return.
> > I don't like such behavior: Sometimes i need to stub-out some code, to
> I agree with you entirely on this one.
> Does anyone have any idea as to how to implement this?
> > test/debug methods, and i can't simply put ^self in the very beginning
> > of method (it forces me to put '[^self] value' instead, just to get
> > around such 'cleverness' of compiler ).
> > Very inconvenient and useless feature, as for me, and it can be simply
> > replaced by ignoring any input instead.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev