Maybe this is something the compiler could do without extending the syntax since, I far as I understood, "#(...) asByteArray" is always equivalent to"#[...]"
Statically, the compiler could make the conversion. No? Alexandre On 30 Jan 2009, at 10:55, Lukas Renggli wrote: >> so do I understand correctly that your point is to replace >> asByteArray by #[] > > Yes, instead of writing > > #( 1 2 3 ) asByteArray > > you write > > #[ 1 2 3 ] > > Which is much faster and saves memory, as no conversion and no copying > happens at runtime. All Smalltalk dialects (with the exception of > GemStone) support this syntax. Pharo should have it too. > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > 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
