hi richard > WTF?!
If you have a real argument we are really open to discussion. > These are the only reasons? I think that they are sufficient but again we are not saying that we know everything and that any solutions could not be rollback. We are doing and learning. Now having clean, lean and fast core classes are important. Because we could have and:or: or:and: and:and:or: and a couple of others in that case. > Why do we have #value:value:value: then? Because this is part of block protocol in the ANSI and because you cannot do it only with value: >> - and: is optimized by the compiler > We could use C, where "everything" is optimized by the compiler. I think that your point is out of scope but if you want you can use C. Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
