+1 for an ANSICompatibility package ... ANSI shouldn't hold Pharo back,
and an ANSICompatibility package allows for cross-dialect code sharing
which was the aim of the ANSI standard in the first place.
Dale
On 9/3/15 5:51 PM, Ben Coman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 4:44 AM, Gabriel Cotelli <[email protected]> wrote:
I've second Sven here. In case anybody wants the old method put it in some
ANSICompatibility package to ease porting packages from ANSI-compliant
Smalltalks.
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[email protected]> wrote:
We went through a lot of effort/pain to move to substring, I think for
good reasons.
On 03 Sep 2015, at 21:31, Dimitris Chloupis <[email protected]>
wrote:
why not both ?
Because the proper English spelling is with lowercase
+1. As a consequence, its the form that has won industry wide.
Aligning on this provides a small part of an accumulation of items
that lower the friction of adoption from the wider industry. On the
flip side, even though are potentially more non-Smalltalkers who may
adopt Pharo, others from existing Smalltalker dialects may be more
likely to transfer, so its good to not alienate them. So it may be
useful to have an ANSICompatibility package available in the Catalog
Browser that you can point people to - a box to tick on the checklist
to reduce the barriers to entry.
cheers -ben
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=define%3A+substring&ia=definition
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:45 PM stepharo <[email protected]> wrote:
*) It appears that Pharo is removing subString: in favor of
substring:. The ANSI standard defines subString:.
I was not aware of it. In fact ANSI is bad and totally incomplete
(for example we studies strings and this is a mess and totally
incomplete).
Now we should probably add it. I will send the mail to the
mailing-list and let people decide.
