On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 12:07 AM, David Mitchell
<david.mitchell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think modifying the parser is a pretty big expectation for an
> application or framework.

Depends on the point of view.  It's the normal order of business in
some other powerful language I know. :)  But if doing something like
this is alien to the Smalltalk culture then that is an important
consideration.

> Wasn't my point. I think the long form is clearer. One of the great
> things about Smalltalk is the simple object+message syntax. Brace
> notation is something else. It can be handy at times, but I think the
> other form is clearer.

Fair enough.  I didn't mean to imply that you believe in the "Java
way" or anything like that, but simply to point out the slippery slope
that lies nearby.  Code generation can certainly be very handy, one
just has to avoid going overboard (of course I don't see your example
as going overboard).