On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Igor, > > Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp > needs PetitParser. > The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine > for Squeak as well. <snip> > How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 > ================================ > > Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak > ------------------------------------------- > > Load > [PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) > by Frank Shearar > > This package contains as the only method > > Symbol>>isBinary > ^ self precedence = 2. Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? frank |
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote:
> On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Igor, >> >> Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >> needs PetitParser. >> The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >> for Squeak as well. > <snip> >> How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >> ================================ >> >> Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >> ------------------------------------------- >> >> Load >> [PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >> by Frank Shearar >> >> This package contains as the only method >> >> Symbol>>isBinary >> ^ self precedence = 2. > > Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix Levente > > frank > > |
On 26 August 2012 14:28, Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: > >> On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Igor, >>> >>> Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >>> needs PetitParser. >>> The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >>> for Squeak as well. >> >> <snip> >>> >>> How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >>> ================================ >>> >>> Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Load >>> [PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >>> by Frank Shearar >>> >>> This package contains as the only method >>> >>> Symbol>>isBinary >>> ^ self precedence = 2. >> >> >> Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? > > > I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as > #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix That sounds like a good idea. frank > Levente > >> >> frank >> >> > |
The class #Symbol in Pharo 1.4 has the two methods
isBinary "Answer whether the receiver is a binary message selector." ^ self precedence = 2 and isInfix "Answer whether the receiver is an infix message selector." ^ self precedence = 2 The implementation tells us that they are synonyms there. The class #Symbol in Squeak 4.3#12192 does not have the method #isBinary but #isInfix is there isInfix "Answer whether the receiver is an infix message selector." ^ self precedence = 2 >From my point of view there is no problem of including #isBinary --Hannes On 8/26/12, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote: > On 26 August 2012 14:28, Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: >> >>> On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Igor, >>>> >>>> Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >>>> needs PetitParser. >>>> The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >>>> for Squeak as well. >>> >>> <snip> >>>> >>>> How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >>>> ================================ >>>> >>>> Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >>>> ------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> Load >>>> [PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >>>> by Frank Shearar >>>> >>>> This package contains as the only method >>>> >>>> Symbol>>isBinary >>>> ^ self precedence = 2. >>> >>> >>> Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? >> >> >> I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as >> #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix > > That sounds like a good idea. > > frank > >> Levente >> >>> >>> frank >>> >>> >> > > |
In reply to this post by Levente Uzonyi-2
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:28:37PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: > > >On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>Igor, > >> > >>Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp > >>needs PetitParser. > >>The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine > >>for Squeak as well. > ><snip> > >>How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 > >>================================ > >> > >>Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak > >>------------------------------------------- > >> > >>Load > >>[PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) > >>by Frank Shearar > >> > >>This package contains as the only method > >> > >> Symbol>>isBinary > >> ^ self precedence = 2. > > > >Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? > > I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as > #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix > +1 to a good comment. I would not object to including Symbol>>isBinary if it helps compatibility, but I can't help but point out that it seems to a poor naming choice. What in the world is a "binary symbol"? From the name alone I would have inferred a symbol with two possible states, such as #true and #false. The name #inInfix is better because it gives a clue to the reader, who may understand that "infix" has something to do with parsing as opposed to the general concept of binary-ness. Dave |
On 26 August 2012 19:40, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:28:37PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: >> >> >On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>Igor, >> >> >> >>Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >> >>needs PetitParser. >> >>The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >> >>for Squeak as well. >> ><snip> >> >>How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >> >>================================ >> >> >> >>Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >> >>------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >>Load >> >>[PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >> >>by Frank Shearar >> >> >> >>This package contains as the only method >> >> >> >> Symbol>>isBinary >> >> ^ self precedence = 2. >> > >> >Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? >> >> I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as >> #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix >> > > +1 to a good comment. > > I would not object to including Symbol>>isBinary if it helps compatibility, > but I can't help but point out that it seems to a poor naming choice. What > in the world is a "binary symbol"? From the name alone I would have inferred > a symbol with two possible states, such as #true and #false. The name #inInfix > is better because it gives a clue to the reader, who may understand that "infix" > has something to do with parsing as opposed to the general concept of binary-ness. I'd thought "binary selector" was a common name for symbols like #+ and friends? But I must confess that I misunderstood the meaning of the method at first, thinking that it meant a symbol that named a binary function (as in, one taking two arguments). Partly that's the fault of the heavily overloaded term "binary" though! frank > Dave > > |
In reply to this post by David T. Lewis
We have Symbol>>#isKeyword and #isUnary but you didn't complain about those..
One of the first things learned by new Smalltalkers is that selectors are Symbols and there are three types of selectors. IMO, #isBinary is long overdue to be included in the API. On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:40 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:28:37PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote: >> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: >> >> >On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >>Igor, >> >> >> >>Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >> >>needs PetitParser. >> >>The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >> >>for Squeak as well. >> ><snip> >> >>How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >> >>================================ >> >> >> >>Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >> >>------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >>Load >> >>[PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >> >>by Frank Shearar >> >> >> >>This package contains as the only method >> >> >> >> Symbol>>isBinary >> >> ^ self precedence = 2. >> > >> >Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? >> >> I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as >> #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix >> > > +1 to a good comment. > > I would not object to including Symbol>>isBinary if it helps compatibility, > but I can't help but point out that it seems to a poor naming choice. What > in the world is a "binary symbol"? From the name alone I would have inferred > a symbol with two possible states, such as #true and #false. The name #inInfix > is better because it gives a clue to the reader, who may understand that "infix" > has something to do with parsing as opposed to the general concept of binary-ness. > > Dave > > |
On 26 August 2012 22:50, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We have Symbol>>#isKeyword and #isUnary but you didn't complain about those.. > > One of the first things learned by new Smalltalkers is that selectors > are Symbols and there are three types of selectors. IMO, #isBinary is > long overdue to be included in the API. Hm, if only there was an implementation in the Inbox, together with a test suite... :) frank > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:40 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:28:37PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote: >>> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: >>> >>> >On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>Igor, >>> >> >>> >>Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp >>> >>needs PetitParser. >>> >>The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine >>> >>for Squeak as well. >>> ><snip> >>> >>How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 >>> >>================================ >>> >> >>> >>Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak >>> >>------------------------------------------- >>> >> >>> >>Load >>> >>[PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) >>> >>by Frank Shearar >>> >> >>> >>This package contains as the only method >>> >> >>> >> Symbol>>isBinary >>> >> ^ self precedence = 2. >>> > >>> >Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? >>> >>> I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as >>> #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix >>> >> >> +1 to a good comment. >> >> I would not object to including Symbol>>isBinary if it helps compatibility, >> but I can't help but point out that it seems to a poor naming choice. What >> in the world is a "binary symbol"? From the name alone I would have inferred >> a symbol with two possible states, such as #true and #false. The name #inInfix >> is better because it gives a clue to the reader, who may understand that "infix" >> has something to do with parsing as opposed to the general concept of binary-ness. >> >> Dave >> >> > |
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 10:51:43PM +0100, Frank Shearar wrote:
> On 26 August 2012 22:50, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote: > > We have Symbol>>#isKeyword and #isUnary but you didn't complain about those.. You're right, we have #isUnary and #isInfix. In my opinion #isBinary is not as good a name as #isInfix in this context. But I'm not complaining and I don't object to adding #isBinary. > > > > One of the first things learned by new Smalltalkers is that selectors > > are Symbols and there are three types of selectors. IMO, #isBinary is > > long overdue to be included in the API. > > Hm, if only there was an implementation in the Inbox, together with a > test suite... :) Thanks Frank, It looks good to me, especially the test suite :) +1 on adding moving it to trunk. Dave > > frank > > > On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 1:40 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:28:37PM +0200, Levente Uzonyi wrote: > >>> On Sun, 26 Aug 2012, Frank Shearar wrote: > >>> > >>> >On 25 August 2012 22:12, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> >>Igor, > >>> >> > >>> >>Below are the instructions for loading PetitParser manually. NBHelp > >>> >>needs PetitParser. > >>> >>The Monticello configuration needs to be adapted so that it works fine > >>> >>for Squeak as well. > >>> ><snip> > >>> >>How to load NBHelp in Squeak 4.3 > >>> >>================================ > >>> >> > >>> >>Load Pharo compatibility package for Squeak > >>> >>------------------------------------------- > >>> >> > >>> >>Load > >>> >>[PharoCompatibility](http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoCompatibility) > >>> >>by Frank Shearar > >>> >> > >>> >>This package contains as the only method > >>> >> > >>> >> Symbol>>isBinary > >>> >> ^ self precedence = 2. > >>> > > >>> >Are there any objections to folding this single method into trunk? > >>> > >>> I'd like to see a comment about what it means and that it's the same as > >>> #isInfix. Maybe the implementation could be simply: ^self isInfix > >>> > >> > >> +1 to a good comment. > >> > >> I would not object to including Symbol>>isBinary if it helps compatibility, > >> but I can't help but point out that it seems to a poor naming choice. What > >> in the world is a "binary symbol"? From the name alone I would have inferred > >> a symbol with two possible states, such as #true and #false. The name #inInfix > >> is better because it gives a clue to the reader, who may understand that "infix" > >> has something to do with parsing as opposed to the general concept of binary-ness. > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> > > |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |