Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> I don't see a reason to follow the standard so closely that it would >> make for a less useful behaviour. > > Unfortunately, this is not something that I can do (nor want, > actually).
It's a side issue. It doesn't have the intended effect if you take it out of context like that. But it was not a general statement, anyway. I was speaking specifically of something Stephen wrote: > Furthermore, <Dictionary factory>>>#withAll: is equivalent to its > current definition in GST, so its arg must also be an > <abstractDictionary> as implied by the above addAll: definition. Taken literally, the standard says "nothing but Dictionary". But my point is, if a Dictionary is a Collection of Associations, any such Collection can be used. This isn't a violation of standard. It's interpretation. That's what "abstract" in "<abstractDictionary>" means. "If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, ..." The only thing that stands in the way of that is #do:. Dictionary>>#do: isn't in the standard, so compliance is not really a problem. Jānis _______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
