On 22 December 2012 19:04, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean at clipperadams.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> H. Hirzel wrote
>> > As Chris points out, the difference is minimal.
>> >
>> > Sean, it looks like you need better examples to show how you perceive
>> > the benefits of the FileSystem design
>>
>> While you ignored the point of my followup post, which is that beauty and
>> simplicity lead to more than the sum of a few keywords, here are a few
>> basic
>> examples...
>>
>> Example #1:
>> file := FileDirectory directoryEntryFor: '/path/to/file'.
>> FileDirectory extensionFor: file name.
>>
>> vs.
>>
>> file2 := '/path/to/file' asFileReference.
>> file2 extension.
>>
>> #2:
>> (FileDirectory on: 'path') entryAt: 'nohup.out'.
>> vs.
>> 'path' asFileReference / 'filename'
>>
>> "Most operations routed through one massive FD class" vs. "immediate
>> access
>> to the domain object you want"; not to mention the appreciated absence of
>> parens.
>>
>> No difference??
>>
> But with
>
> String methods for *FileSystem-utilities
> / aPath
>       ^self asFileReference / aPath
>
> you get
>
>     'path' / 'filename'
>
> and that's *really* nice.
>
> Does anyone think that '123' / '45' is good??
>
> This is a compromise:
>
> / arg
>     self size = 0 ifTrue: [self error: 'cannot coerce the empty string].
>     ^('+-01234456789' incudes: self first)
>         ifTrue: [arg adaptToString: self andSend: #/]
>         ifFalse: [self asFileReference / arg]
>
> the issue here being whether FileSystem wants '.profile' or '.hg' et al or
> math wants '.123'.
>
> If FileSystem provides path-name checking then the above could include a
> specific legality check instead of the naive discrimination.
>
> Personally I find the prospect of a concise file scripting api much more
> appealing than lazy numeric conversion.  The absence of the former is why so
> much of my life involves bash scripts.  The latter isn't necessary if one
> starts off with numbers in the first place, and being literals they're as
> easy, no, easier than denoting numbers using strings (1 + 1 is shorter than
> '1' + 1).
>


yes, i want string math, because at the end, everything you type into
machine is strings, so having objects, classes or compiled methods
seems like overcomplication, when you can do the same by just using
stings..
We definitely should reconsider "everything is an object" postulate,
instead we should postulate "everything is string",
otherwise smalltalk will never be a successful platform like
javascript/perl etc.

oh, yes, and while we're changing that, please add the 'math' precedence rules,
because my math teacher is the school told me that this is the only
right way they should be processed,
oh, and at last, lets use curly braces syntax because it is sooo convenient.
;)

> I hope Squeak integrates FileSystem in 4.4 for 4.5.
> --
> best,
> Eliot


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.