Hi Folks,

This works great with the examples provided earlier. But a bit more of 
testing show new issues (this new issues happen both with Cog and the 
interpreter):

true
    ifTrue: [ Transcript cr; show: 'was true' ];
    ifFalse: [ Transcript cr; show: 'was false'  ];
    ifTrue: [ Transcript cr; show: 'was true2'  ] ifFalse: [ Transcript 
cr; show: 'was false2'  ];
    ifFalse: [ Transcript cr; show: 'was false3'  ] ifTrue: [ Transcript 
cr; show: 'was true3'  ]

prints:
was true
was true2
was false3

and this code:
7
    ifNil: [Transcript cr; show:  'nil' ];
    ifNotNil: [ Transcript cr; show: 'not nil'  ];
    ifNil: [Transcript cr; show:  'nil2' ] ifNotNil: [ Transcript cr; 
show: 'not nil2'  ];
    ifNotNil: [ Transcript cr; show: 'not nil3'  ] ifNil: [Transcript 
cr; show:  'nil3' ]

prints:
not nil
not nil2
nil3

Besides, if these expressions are put in a method, and I decompile it, 
and I get a dnu when decompiling the #ifTrue:ifFalse: call 
(UndefinedObject dnu #isMessage:receiver:arguments:). I remove that 
call, and I get swapped the blocks in the #ifNotNil:ifNil: and the 
#:ifFalse:ifTrue: calls.

Thanks,
Juan Vuletich

Eliot Miranda wrote:
> Looks good to me.  Thanks, Nicolas!
>
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Nicolas Cellier 
> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com 
> <mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Oops, I always forget to select changes before filing out...
>
>     Nicolas
>
>     2011/3/3 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
>     <mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>>:
>     > Then attached proof of concept may work.
>     >
>     > Nicolas
>     >
>     > 2011/3/3 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com
>     <mailto:eliot.miranda at gmail.com>>:
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Nicolas Cellier
>     >> <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
>     <mailto:nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     >>>
>     >>> One dumb way would be to retain a copy of
>     >>> originalSelector & originalArguments in MethodNode ivar at
>     creation,
>     >>> then let #ensureCanCascade: restore the originals.
>     >>
>     >> I like this.  Not at all dumb.
>     >>
>     >>>
>     >>> Nicolas
>     >>>
>     >>> 2011/3/2 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com
>     <mailto:eliot.miranda at gmail.com>>:
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>> > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Juan Vuletich
>     <juan at jvuletich.org <mailto:juan at jvuletich.org>>
>     >>> > wrote:
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> Hi Eliot,
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> Thanks for caring!
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> The attached code fixed the case I reported first, but not
>     this:
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> true ifTrue: [ 'was true' print ]; ifFalse: [ 'not true'
>     print ]
>     >>> >
>     >>> > Does the second one have to be unoptimized?  I guess that in
>     this both
>     >>> > are
>     >>> > deoptimized right?
>     >>> >
>     >>> > true ifTrue: [ 'was true' print ]; ifFalse: [ 'not true'
>     print ];
>     >>> > yourself
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> Thanks,
>     >>> >> Juan Vuletich
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >> Eliot Miranda wrote:
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>> Hi Juan,
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>     I think the deoptimize-after-the-fact approach has no
>     hope of
>     >>> >>> working
>     >>> >>> given the transformations for ifFalse:ifTrue: (swap
>     arguments and
>     >>> >>> transform
>     >>> >>> to ifTrue:ifFalse:), ifNil:ifNotNil: et al.  Better is to
>     avoid
>     >>> >>> transforming
>     >>> >>> at all if in a cascade.  So the attached is a start.  It needs
>     >>> >>> cleaning up,
>     >>> >>> the older hack (ensureCanCascade:) removing and either all
>     uses of
>     >>> >>> receiver:selector:arguments:precedence:from:sourceRange:
>     should use
>     >>> >>>
>     receiver:selector:arguments:precedence:from:sourceRange:canTransform:,
>     >>> >>> or
>     >>> >>> implement
>     receiver:selector:arguments:precedence:from:sourceRange in
>     >>> >>> terms
>     >>> >>> of
>     >>> >>>
>     receiver:selector:arguments:precedence:from:sourceRange:canTransform.
>     >>> >>>  Anyway, test this and see how you get on.
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>> cheers,
>     >>> >>> Eliot
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Juan Vuletich
>     <juan at jvuletich.org <mailto:juan at jvuletich.org>
>     >>> >>> <mailto:juan at jvuletich.org <mailto:juan at jvuletich.org>>>
>     wrote:
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    Hi Folks,
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    commits at source.squeak.org
>     <mailto:commits at source.squeak.org>
>     <mailto:commits at source.squeak.org
>     <mailto:commits at source.squeak.org>> wrote:
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>        Nicolas Cellier uploaded a new version of Compiler
>     to project
>     >>> >>>        The Trunk:
>     >>> >>>        http://source.squeak.org/trunk/Compiler-nice.189.mcz
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>        ==================== Summary ====================
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>        Name: Compiler-nice.189
>     >>> >>>        Author: nice
>     >>> >>>        Time: 13 February 2011, 7:44:38.363 pm
>     >>> >>>        UUID: 3f6f02cd-1acf-48de-a388-b5ac55e27055
>     >>> >>>        Ancestors: Compiler-nice.188
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>        Enable cascading of special messages by
>     deoptimizing, thanks
>     >>> >>>        Eliot.
>     >>> >>>        This is mostly useless, but it removes an arbitrary
>     limitation
>     >>> >>>        of the language.
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>        =============== Diff against Compiler-nice.188
>     ===============
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    I integrated this nice code in Cuis, and tried:
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    true ifTrue: [ Transcript cr; show: 'was true' ]; yourself
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    I found that this works ok with the interpreter but
>     does nothing
>     >>> >>>    in Cog. A bug, right?
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>    Cheers,
>     >>> >>>    Juan Vuletich
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>> No virus found in this message.
>     >>> >>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
>     <http://www.avg.com>
>     >>> >>> Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3477 - Release Date:
>     >>> >>> 03/02/11
>     >>> >>>
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >>
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>> >
>     >>>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>   
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
> Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3477 - Release Date: 03/02/11
>