2015-10-05 14:53 GMT+02:00 Damien Cassou <[email protected]>: > The comment of the following method seems to be more an explanation of > the implementation than of the expected behavior. Should we change that > to something like: "Return an instance of RBBlockNode representing the > receiver's AST." > > Which would completely hide the reason for going backward one step in the bytecode.
I'd vote for adding to the current comment. Thierry > BlockClosure>>sourceNode > "the bytecode just before the first bytecode of the block is a bytecode > that creates the complete block" > ^ self method sourceNodeForPC: self startpc - 1. > > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without > losing enthusiasm." --Winston Churchill > >
