I agree and to me looks like a change for a change.
There are so much things I would like to see better in Pharo...


On Dec 29, 2008, at 2:51 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote:

> 2008/12/29 Alexandre Bergel <[email protected]>:
>> Frankly speaking, I am left unconvinced that allowing argument to be
>> writable will increase the quality of Pharo.
>>
> me too.
> It would be better to keep distinction between arguments and temps and
> do not rely on implementation.
> I think that in stack-based VM , an assignable arguments could be
> problematic, because if you want to restart a method, you will be
> unable to recover original values because they are not copied in
> context but lying on stack.
>
>> Alexandre
>>
>>
>> On 27 Dec 2008, at 13:31, David Pennell wrote:
>>
>>> Its handy to at least have the option of making args writable in
>>> order to support implementing languages like Javascript on top of
>>> the bytecode set.
>>>
>>> -david
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 27, 2008 at 8:43 AM, Yoshiki Ohshima <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>> At Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:24:02 -0800,
>>> Vassili Bykov wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 7:32 PM, Yoshiki Ohshima
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> At Wed, 24 Dec 2008 11:11:16 +0100,
>>>>> Michael Rueger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What really is the convenience of modifying an argument? Having
>>> not to
>>>>>> think up another name? I never understood this argument
>>> especially if
>>>>>> you need to use the original value of the argument in several
>>> places.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you can think of an argument as a "temp initialized by the
>>>>> caller" (like C), that kind of unifies the args and temps and
>>> would
>>>>> reduce the implementation complexity.  In *some cases* it would
>>> reduce
>>>>> the lines of code in the user land.
>>>>
>>>> Or alternatively one can think of a temp as an argument of an
>>> invisible block,
>>>>
>>>>    | foo |
>>>>    foo := 3.
>>>>    ...
>>>>
>>>> being a form of
>>>>
>>>>    [:foo | ...] value: 3.
>>>
>>> If args are assignable, and yes you can unify methods and blocks.
>>>
>>> But I'm pretty much convinced that debugged context being
>>> restartable (by making args readonly) is important in practice.
>>>
>>> -- Yoshiki
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>> --
>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
>> Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to