Alle 18:16, mercoledì 9 agosto 2006, Ron Teitelbaum ha scritto:
Hi Davide,
I just wrote up something like this for Sedar:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/beginners/2006-August/000701.ht
m l
To answer your question directly the answer is yes and no.
MAny thanks to all of you, now
When I get home(and if the weather isn't too nice) I play with Squeak.
But when I go to work, I write Java(like a lot of people on this
list, I'd imagine).
One of the things that prevents me from even considering it at work is
the lack of Oracle driver support. Of course, I could write that
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:43:46 +0200, Michael Kohout wrote:
When I get home(and if the weather isn't too nice) I play with Squeak.
But when I go to work, I write Java(like a lot of people on this
list, I'd imagine).
8-)
One of the things that prevents me from even considering it at work is
From: Klaus D. Witzel
On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:11:40 +0200, Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
Brian,
Yes I agree it's a great suggestion, although a few changes:
Literal blocks to not parse into collections automatically.
Ron, please: a literal Array is a subclass of Collection and so the blocks
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:27:09 +0200, Roel Wuyts wrote:
Note: no need for the endEntry when using show: it does it already (see
TranscriptStream#show: )
Use a 'manual' endEntry when you would use nextPutAll: or print: etc. on
the Transcript (which most people do not use anyway).
Right you
Hi Ron,
on Thu, 10 Aug 2006 17:02:11 +0200, you wrote:
From: Klaus D. Witzel
... You didn't inspectIt for verifying
No I didn't! The { } just looked so wrong and like C!
Yes, same for me when I saw that for the first time in Squeak. Never saw
that in Smalltalk/2.x (didn't look for it in
