thanks butcher :)
You worked too much with philippe :)))))

Stef


On May 26, 2010, at 1:20 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:

>> not right to me. I wanted to express the feeling that, for me, the one
>> of the best things about Smalltalk is its readability in difference to
>> C, which is very fast. The »new compiler optimize« both, anyway.
> 
> - The "New Compiler" does not yet work.
> 
> - The optimized #and:and:and: code never decompiled correctly.
> 
> - The exact semantics of #and:and:and: is not clear without knowing
> how it is implemented.
> 
> - There are subtle semantic differences between "a and: [ b ] and: [ c
> ] and: [ d ]" and "a and: [ b and: [ c and: [ d ] ] ]" if the
> conditions have side-effects.
> 
> - The #and:and:and: constructs are very confusing to newbies, I have
> seen that numerous times.
> 
> - The use of #and:and:and: doesn't shorten code.
> 
> - #and:and:and: is not necessary from a language point of view.
> 
> - And most important for me: #and:and:and: is incompatible with the
> rest of the world.
> 
> Lukas
> 
> -- 
> Lukas Renggli
> www.lukas-renggli.ch
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to