On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 2:08 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaring...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi Clément,
>
> On 27/04/2018 10:32, Clément Bera wrote:
> > Obviously sets are not as easy to deal with. You cannot mutate empty
> > arrays/bytearrays, if you concatenate something it creates a new object.
> > You can add things in sets. So you need to be careful... You can make
> > the object read-only to avoid issues (MyClassVar beReadOnlyObject).
>
> Sorry, but I can't understand how a class variable could allow you to
> use a new literal.
>
> As far as I knew the only way to have new literals was to modify the
> compiler.
>
Yes.
VA Smalltalk has an interesting syntax extension which allows an arbitrary
expression to be a compile-time literal.
Going by memory, something like ##(Dictionary new at: #a put: self
something; at: #b put: self somethingElse; yourself).
Of course, the problem with that is it will not change if the
implementations of the messages it sends entail some changes over time.
> So if you want #{} to create a new empty set, or #{1 1 2} to create a
> Set with 1 and 2 as elements, there is no way to do it.
>
> Or this %{$a -> 1. 'foo' -> false. 'baz' -> #{1 1 2}} to create a
> dictionary with such set as literal. :)
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Esteban A. Maringolo
>
>
