Quantcast

I was surprised

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

I was surprised

Bob Arning-2

This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:

false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'

Does anything actually depend on this being this way?



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I was surprised

Bert Freudenberg
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Bob Arning <[hidden email]> wrote:

This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:

false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'

Does anything actually depend on this being this way?

Unlikely. It's only ever used with booleans.

- Bert - 


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I was surprised

Bob Arning-2

Or by people making a mistake

'a' = 'a' | 'a' = 'b' ==> false


On 1/3/17 10:06 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Bob Arning <[hidden email]> wrote:

This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:

false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'

Does anything actually depend on this being this way?

Unlikely. It's only ever used with booleans.

- Bert - 



    



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I was surprised

Levente Uzonyi
If you use #or: instead of #| (which should always be the case IMO,
because you hardly ever want non-short-circuit boolean evaluation), then
you'll probably not forget the parentheses:

  'a' = 'a' or: [ 'a' = 'b' ] "==> true"

Or even if you do forget them, you'll still get the expected result
because of the higher precedence:

  'a' = 'a' or: 'a' = 'b' "==> true"

Levente

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Bob Arning wrote:

>
> Or by people making a mistake
>
> 'a' = 'a' | 'a' = 'b' ==> false
>
>
> On 1/3/17 10:06 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>       On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Bob Arning <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>             This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:
>
>             false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'
>
>             Does anything actually depend on this being this way?
>
> Unlikely. It's only ever used with booleans.
>
> - Bert - 
>
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

I was surprised

Louis LaBrunda
In reply to this post by Bob Arning-2
Hi Bob,

It is the same in VA Smalltalk.  The code of false>>| is:

| aBoolean

        "Answer true if either the receiver or aBoolean
         is true; answer false otherwise."

        ^aBoolean

This is about as simple an implementation as one can have.  Anything else would require testing
the class of the parameter (aBoolean) adding a fair amount of overhead for what I think is very
little gain.  I expect the error would be found soon anyway when the result is sent an #ifTrue:
like message.

Lou

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 07:17:45 -0500, Bob Arning <[hidden email]> wrote:

>This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:
>
>false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'
>
>Does anything actually depend on this being this way?
--
Louis LaBrunda
Keystone Software Corp.
SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I was surprised

Bob Arning-2
In reply to this post by Levente Uzonyi

I rarely use | myself, but I was translating some javascript and trying not to misread it and failed to think about the parens in that case. When the code was not working correctly, I was scratching my head until I saw my mistake, but my surprise was that it hadn't blown up the first time I ran it.


On 1/3/17 1:11 PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
If you use #or: instead of #| (which should always be the case IMO, because you hardly ever want non-short-circuit boolean evaluation), then you'll probably not forget the parentheses:

    'a' = 'a' or: [ 'a' = 'b' ] "==> true"

Or even if you do forget them, you'll still get the expected result
because of the higher precedence:

    'a' = 'a' or: 'a' = 'b' "==> true"

Levente

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017, Bob Arning wrote:


Or by people making a mistake

'a' = 'a' | 'a' = 'b' ==> false


On 1/3/17 10:06 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
      On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:17 PM, Bob Arning [hidden email] wrote:

            This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:

            false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'

            Does anything actually depend on this being this way?

Unlikely. It's only ever used with booleans.

- Bert - 








    



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: I was surprised

Bob Arning-2
In reply to this post by Louis LaBrunda

You would find the error in that case, but

'a' = 'a' | 'a' = 'b' ifTrue: []

runs runs without error, although probably not the way the author intended. Just for fun I have modified my image to insist the arg be a boolean. Nothing unexpected so far.


On 1/3/17 1:22 PM, Louis LaBrunda wrote:
Hi Bob,

It is the same in VA Smalltalk.  The code of false>>| is:

| aBoolean

	"Answer true if either the receiver or aBoolean
	 is true; answer false otherwise."

	^aBoolean

This is about as simple an implementation as one can have.  Anything else would require testing
the class of the parameter (aBoolean) adding a fair amount of overhead for what I think is very
little gain.  I expect the error would be found soon anyway when the result is sent an #ifTrue:
like message.

Lou

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 07:17:45 -0500, Bob Arning [hidden email] wrote:

This has been this way for aeons, but it surprised me:

false | 'hello'  ==> 'hello'

Does anything actually depend on this being this way?



Loading...