Pool dictionary entries and array shorthand
Locked
Pool dictionary entries and array shorthand
 
|
Hi,
I'm sure we have all used the array creation shorthand: #(5 4 3 2 1). When trying to create an array with elements of a pool dictionary like: #(BlueWool LimeWool) one ends up with an array of the symbolic names of the pool dictionary entries and not their values: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool). IMHO this is almost useless. If I wanted the symbols in an array I would just use: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool) which looks like what was wanted and isn't much more to type. I think the values is what one would expect from: #(BlueWool LimeWool) and not the symbols and I don't see any other shorthand way to get them. VA Smalltalk works the same way. I don't know about any other Smalltalk. Both Smalltalks pretty print it the same way they do with any other pool dictionary usage. I don't want to go so far as to call this a bug but I'm close. I don't see why one would want it to work this way and I can see great value in building the array with the pool values. Can we get this changed? Does anyone depend on the current implementation? Lou ----------------------------------------------------------- Louis LaBrunda Keystone Software Corp. SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon mailto:[hidden email] http://www.Keystone-Software.com |
Re: Pool dictionary entries and array shorthand
|
|
On 5 March 2013 19:17, Louis LaBrunda <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi, > > I'm sure we have all used the array creation shorthand: #(5 4 3 2 1). When > trying to create an array with elements of a pool dictionary like: > #(BlueWool LimeWool) one ends up with an array of the symbolic names of the > pool dictionary entries and not their values: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool). > > IMHO this is almost useless. If I wanted the symbols in an array I would > just use: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool) which looks like what was wanted and isn't > much more to type. I think the values is what one would expect from: > #(BlueWool LimeWool) and not the symbols and I don't see any other > shorthand way to get them. a := 1. b := 2. {a. b.} == Array with: a with: b #() array literals have their uses because they're _compile-time_ calculated. A method that uses them won't pay the cost of creating the array on every invocation. frank > VA Smalltalk works the same way. I don't know about any other Smalltalk. > Both Smalltalks pretty print it the same way they do with any other pool > dictionary usage. > > I don't want to go so far as to call this a bug but I'm close. I don't see > why one would want it to work this way and I can see great value in > building the array with the pool values. Can we get this changed? Does > anyone depend on the current implementation? > > Lou > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Louis LaBrunda > Keystone Software Corp. > SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon > mailto:[hidden email] http://www.Keystone-Software.com > > |
Re: Pool dictionary entries and array shorthand
|
|
In reply to this post by Louis LaBrunda
The thing to remember is that #() is a literal
array - the contents do not depend on the state of the system when
you write the expression. If you want to include non-literal
values, you can use braces
{BlueWool. LimeWool} Cheers, Bob On 3/5/13 2:17 PM, Louis LaBrunda
wrote:
Hi, I'm sure we have all used the array creation shorthand: #(5 4 3 2 1). When trying to create an array with elements of a pool dictionary like: #(BlueWool LimeWool) one ends up with an array of the symbolic names of the pool dictionary entries and not their values: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool). IMHO this is almost useless. If I wanted the symbols in an array I would just use: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool) which looks like what was wanted and isn't much more to type. I think the values is what one would expect from: #(BlueWool LimeWool) and not the symbols and I don't see any other shorthand way to get them. VA Smalltalk works the same way. I don't know about any other Smalltalk. Both Smalltalks pretty print it the same way they do with any other pool dictionary usage. I don't want to go so far as to call this a bug but I'm close. I don't see why one would want it to work this way and I can see great value in building the array with the pool values. Can we get this changed? Does anyone depend on the current implementation? Lou ----------------------------------------------------------- Louis LaBrunda Keystone Software Corp. SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon [hidden email] http://www.Keystone-Software.com |
Pool dictionary entries and array shorthand
|
|
Thanks Bob and Frank,
I thought I had tried: {BlueWool. LimeWool} but must have done something wrong and then just posted about #(). Lou >The thing to remember is that #() is a literal array - the contents do >not depend on the state of the system when you write the expression. If >you want to include non-literal values, you can use braces > >{BlueWool. LimeWool} > >Cheers, >Bob > >On 3/5/13 2:17 PM, Louis LaBrunda wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I'm sure we have all used the array creation shorthand: #(5 4 3 2 1). When >> trying to create an array with elements of a pool dictionary like: >> #(BlueWool LimeWool) one ends up with an array of the symbolic names of the >> pool dictionary entries and not their values: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool). >> >> IMHO this is almost useless. If I wanted the symbols in an array I would >> just use: #(#BlueWool #LimeWool) which looks like what was wanted and isn't >> much more to type. I think the values is what one would expect from: >> #(BlueWool LimeWool) and not the symbols and I don't see any other >> shorthand way to get them. >> >> VA Smalltalk works the same way. I don't know about any other Smalltalk. >> Both Smalltalks pretty print it the same way they do with any other pool >> dictionary usage. >> >> I don't want to go so far as to call this a bug but I'm close. I don't see >> why one would want it to work this way and I can see great value in >> building the array with the pool values. Can we get this changed? Does >> anyone depend on the current implementation? >> >> Lou >> ----------------------------------------------------------- >> Louis LaBrunda >> Keystone Software Corp. >> SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon >> mailto:[hidden email] http://www.Keystone-Software.com >> >> >> Louis LaBrunda Keystone Software Corp. SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon mailto:[hidden email] http://www.Keystone-Software.com |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |