We do not plan to remove self halt.
We plan to have better code expansion :) like ctrl sh => self halt :)


On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:26 AM, Alistair Grant <akgrant0...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4 April 2018 at 22:20, Peter Uhnák <i.uh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If we remove self halt, then I won't be able to use `1halt.`. :-D which is
>> actually what I always do, because writing `self halt` is 4 characters tooo
>> long. :)
>> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 9:40 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Peter Uhnák wrote
>>> > Would it be possible to instead have a #haltIf object to which you can
>>> > send
>>> > additional conditions?
>>> Maybe we could use that as an excuse to clean more halting out of object
>>> completely e.g.
>>> self halt now
>>> self halt once
>>> self halt ifInsideTest
>>> self halt ifOutsideTest
>>> self halt xyz
>>> Although IIRC when we first started cleaning the idea was too eventually
>>> remove all halt-related stuff from Object and only have `Halt xyz`. At the
>>> time, it seemed that was a little too scary, but even today I do not
>>> understand what objectively is gained by `self halt` vs. `Halt now`…
> One (very small) advantage of having 'self halt' is that a few times
> I've had a single, long, expression that I want to halt in, and since
> #halt returns self it is easy to insert it in the middle of an
> expression.
> Cheers,
> Alistair

Reply via email to