To make the whole thing easier to understand we need to distinguish the two
bugs.
1) or: is somehow special. No, it is not. We fixed that, but the fix was broken.
See my other mail.
I would add two different kind of rules to help people and slow the use
of redefinition of special selectors.
This is now fixed in 50026.
2) someone wrote or: [] where no block was supposed to be.
The reason for that is lint rule RBIfTrueBlocksRule, which statically enforces
blocks as parameters for
all of or: and: and ifTrue:… we should:
- remove the [] in that method
- remove the rule RBIfTrueBlocksRule as it makes no sense anymore, it is
from a time when or: was special.
DONE.
Marcus
