On Thu, 7 Aug 2014, J. Vuletich (mail lists) wrote:

> Quoting Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com>:
>
>> On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 12:03 PM, J. Vuletich (mail lists) <
>> juanlists at jvuletich.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> The attach shows that in ST-80 a CompiledMethod can contain a Fraction
>>> literal. Source code form for that is '1e-3'. Debugger works as in Squeak
>>> or Cuis.
>> 
>> 
>> then if you feel strongly change it back, but you need to fix this:
>> 
>> (1/2) isLiteral false
>> 
>> when you do so.
>
> Well, I don't feel strongly about this, and I don't see what needs to be 
> changed back in Squeak or Cuis.
>
> What I say is that the behavior we have in ST-80 / Squeak / Cuis seems right 
> to me, I don't see any problem at all.
>
> So, please elaborate: What should be changed back in Squeak (or Cuis)? Why 
> does (1/2) isLiteral = false needs fixing? I mean, where is the bug? (I mean 
> in ST-80, Squeak and Cuis. Not Pharo, where there is a bug while debugging 
> this stuff.)

Try debugging the following snippet:

| x |
x := 5e-1.
x := x + 1

You'll find that in Cuis it'll be decomipled as:

DoIt
 	| x |
 	x _ (1/2).
 	^ x _ x + 1.

And the debugger will get confused (in Squeak and Pharo too), because 
there's (1/2) instead of 5e-1, which is not a literal.
Also if you press Over, then Proceed in the debugger, then the image will 
become unresponsive in Cuis (Cuis4.2-1766).


Levente

>
>> --
>> best,
>> Eliot
>
> Cheers,
> Juan Vuletich
>
>
>