> not right to me. I wanted to express the feeling that, for me, the one > of the best things about Smalltalk is its readability in difference to > C, which is very fast. The »new compiler optimize« both, anyway.
- The "New Compiler" does not yet work. - The optimized #and:and:and: code never decompiled correctly. - The exact semantics of #and:and:and: is not clear without knowing how it is implemented. - There are subtle semantic differences between "a and: [ b ] and: [ c ] and: [ d ]" and "a and: [ b and: [ c and: [ d ] ] ]" if the conditions have side-effects. - The #and:and:and: constructs are very confusing to newbies, I have seen that numerous times. - The use of #and:and:and: doesn't shorten code. - #and:and:and: is not necessary from a language point of view. - And most important for me: #and:and:and: is incompatible with the rest of the world. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
