[squeak-dev] Selectors with underscores: Have your cake and eat it, too...

Casey Ransberger ron.spengler at gmail.com
Sat Mar 13 04:22:36 UTC 2010


Hmm...

 - Makes filing stuff into the image slightly more dangerous and confusing. (-1)
 - Satisfies all reasonable parties regardless of viewpoint on the matter. (+1)

Zero sum game I guess? Ship it.

On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:14 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Folks -
>
> Attached my take on selectors with underscores. It basically separates the
> issue of using underscores in assignment from the issue of using underscores
> in selectors, puts this into two individual preferences, and allows
> per-class scoping while providing a system-wide default.
>
> The possible combinations of preferences are:
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments off, allowUnderscoreSelectors: off
> The use of underscores is forbidden, i.e., the Croquet model.
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments on, allowUnderscoreSelectors: off
> The classic Squeak usage; all of the following are assignments:
>
>        a _ b   =>              a := b
>        b_ c    =>              b := c
>        d _e    =>              d := e
>        f_g     =>              f := g.
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments off, allowUnderscoreSelectors: on
> The standard usage in other dialects
>
>        a _ b   =>              ((a) _) b
>        b_ c    =>              (b_) c
>        d _e    =>              (d) _e
>        f_g     =>              (f_g)
>
> * allowUnderscoreAssignments on, allowUnderscoreSelectors: on
> The hybrid usage requiring spaces around underscore for assignment:
>
>        a _ b   =>              a := b
>        b_ c    =>              (b_) c
>        d _e    =>              (d) _e
>        f_g     =>              (f_g)
>
> This gives us a range of options to decide how to deal with it. I would
> personally say that for the core image we should go with the first option
> (disable underscores altogether) and only enable whichever option we like
> for the release.
>
> What do people think about this approach? I think it provides the most
> options and gives us ample flexibility to decide what we'd like to use down
> the road.
>
> If there is no fundamental opposition I'll push it into the trunk in a
> couple of days.
>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>
>
>



-- 
Casey Ransberger



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list