Thanks everyone for the nice discussion. So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc.
I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense. However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So, until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave room for playing. In the meantime we have: 1. BlVector x: 10 y: 20 BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30 or: 2. (10@20) asBlocVector (10@20@30) asBlocVector The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra object (the point). An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive. This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix creation. Cheers, Doru > On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > > Tudor Girba-2 wrote >> You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :) > > Ha ha, you got me ;) > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done."
