Why would you want to call #basicAt:? As the comment in Object>>basicAt: says, this works only for indexable objects, and Interval is not indexable. So this looks like the expected behavior to me.
Cheers, Adrian On Nov 21, 2009, at 21:32 , Simon Denier wrote: > Try the following (1) > (1 to: 10) at: 2 > returns 2 > > then (2) > (1 to: 10) basicAt: 2 > raises an exception > > It is surprising. > > Problem is that Interval redefines at: > but in (2), the lookup retrieves Object>>basicAt: which only works for > indexable objects (which an interval is not). > > > So Interval should also redefine basicAt: ? > > > -- > Simon > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
