The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
Locked
 
|
A new version of Collections was added to project The Inbox:
http://source.squeak.org/inbox/Collections-cwp.486.mcz ==================== Summary ==================== Name: Collections-cwp.486 Author: cwp Time: 13 August 2012, 11:29:37.608 pm UUID: a704544c-0077-467c-b316-9b7dc2ebefa1 Ancestors: Collections-cwp.485 Make selector precedence behave correctly in the presence of underscores. =============== Diff against Collections-cwp.485 =============== Item was changed: ----- Method: Symbol>>precedence (in category 'accessing') ----- precedence "Answer the receiver's precedence, assuming it is a valid Smalltalk message selector or 0 otherwise. The numbers are 1 for unary, 2 for binary and 3 for keyword selectors." self size = 0 ifTrue: [^ 0]. - self first isLetter ifFalse: [^ 2]. self last = $: ifTrue: [^ 3]. + (self anySatisfy: [:c | c isLetter]) ifTrue: [^ 1]. + ^ 2! - ^ 1! |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
Hi Folks,
For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at senders & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a consistent behavior. Cheers, Juan Vuletich Quoting [hidden email]: > > Item was changed: > ----- Method: Symbol>>precedence (in category 'accessing') ----- > precedence > "Answer the receiver's precedence, assuming it is a valid Smalltalk > message selector or 0 otherwise. The numbers are 1 for unary, > 2 for binary and 3 for keyword selectors." > > self size = 0 ifTrue: [^ 0]. > - self first isLetter ifFalse: [^ 2]. > self last = $: ifTrue: [^ 3]. > + (self anySatisfy: [:c | c isLetter]) ifTrue: [^ 1]. > + ^ 2! > - ^ 1! > > > Cheers, Juan Vuletich |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
On 14 August 2012 13:29, Juan Vuletich (mail lists)
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Folks, > > For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at senders > & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and > #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a > consistent behavior. Would you mind pasting a sample? frank > Cheers, > Juan Vuletich > > > > Quoting [hidden email]: > >> >> Item was changed: >> ----- Method: Symbol>>precedence (in category 'accessing') ----- >> precedence >> "Answer the receiver's precedence, assuming it is a valid >> Smalltalk >> message selector or 0 otherwise. The numbers are 1 for unary, >> 2 for binary and 3 for keyword selectors." >> >> self size = 0 ifTrue: [^ 0]. >> - self first isLetter ifFalse: [^ 2]. >> self last = $: ifTrue: [^ 3]. >> + (self anySatisfy: [:c | c isLetter]) ifTrue: [^ 1]. >> + ^ 2! >> - ^ 1! >> >> >> > > > > Cheers, > Juan Vuletich > > |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
Quoting Frank Shearar <[hidden email]>:
> On 14 August 2012 13:29, Juan Vuletich (mail lists) > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi Folks, >> >> For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at senders >> & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and >> #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a >> consistent behavior. > > Would you mind pasting a sample? > > frank > >> Cheers, >> Juan Vuletich Please visit http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html and download it. Smalltalk code is much better understood by taking advantage of its tools. Cheers, Juan Vuletich >> >> >> >> Quoting [hidden email]: >> >>> >>> Item was changed: >>> ----- Method: Symbol>>precedence (in category 'accessing') ----- >>> precedence >>> "Answer the receiver's precedence, assuming it is a valid >>> Smalltalk >>> message selector or 0 otherwise. The numbers are 1 for unary, >>> 2 for binary and 3 for keyword selectors." >>> >>> self size = 0 ifTrue: [^ 0]. >>> - self first isLetter ifFalse: [^ 2]. >>> self last = $: ifTrue: [^ 3]. >>> + (self anySatisfy: [:c | c isLetter]) ifTrue: [^ 1]. >>> + ^ 2! >>> - ^ 1! >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Juan Vuletich >> >> > > Cheers, Juan Vuletich |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
On 14 August 2012 14:30, Juan Vuletich (mail lists)
<[hidden email]> wrote: > Quoting Frank Shearar <[hidden email]>: > >> On 14 August 2012 13:29, Juan Vuletich (mail lists) >> <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Folks, >>> >>> For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at >>> senders >>> & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and >>> #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a >>> consistent behavior. >> >> >> Would you mind pasting a sample? >> >> frank >> >>> Cheers, >>> Juan Vuletich > > > Please visit http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html and download it. > Smalltalk code is much better understood by taking advantage of its tools. That might (or might not) be true. Supplying samples to a mailing list advertises the desired style far more effectively than asking people to download images and install software to see it. frank > Cheers, > Juan Vuletich > >>> >>> >>> >>> Quoting [hidden email]: >>> >>>> >>>> Item was changed: >>>> ----- Method: Symbol>>precedence (in category 'accessing') ----- >>>> precedence >>>> "Answer the receiver's precedence, assuming it is a valid >>>> Smalltalk >>>> message selector or 0 otherwise. The numbers are 1 for unary, >>>> 2 for binary and 3 for keyword selectors." >>>> >>>> self size = 0 ifTrue: [^ 0]. >>>> - self first isLetter ifFalse: [^ 2]. >>>> self last = $: ifTrue: [^ 3]. >>>> + (self anySatisfy: [:c | c isLetter]) ifTrue: [^ 1]. >>>> + ^ 2! >>>> - ^ 1! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Juan Vuletich >>> >>> >> >> > > > > Cheers, > Juan Vuletich > |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by J. Vuletich (mail lists)
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Juan Vuletich (mail lists)
<[hidden email]> wrote: > For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at senders > & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and > #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a > consistent behavior. Can you be more specific about what you're suggesting? Are you talking about the distinction between the first character and the subsequent characters when scanning an identifier? Refactoring to reduce duplication? Self documenting code via clear selector names? It's too late in the release cycle to adopt the Cuis' implementation wholesale—particularly since Cuis doesn't pass the all the tests I committed yesterday. (For example, #'_value' precedence answers 2.) For 4.4 I'll be happy if we can make underscore selectors work without having to patch the system before loading a package that contains them. (eg Xtreams). Colin |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
Quoting Colin Putney <[hidden email]>:
> On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Juan Vuletich (mail lists) > <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> For this method, #tokenish and several others, please take a look at senders >> & implementors of #isGenerallyValidInIdentifiers and >> #isGenerallyValidStartOfInIdentifiers in Cuis. This style eases having a >> consistent behavior. > > Can you be more specific about what you're suggesting? Are you talking > about the distinction between the first character and the subsequent > characters when scanning an identifier? Refactoring to reduce > duplication? Self documenting code via clear selector names? Yes, all that. Stating the critera in as few places as possible, and making it as easy to understand (and change) as possible. Avoid calling the preference from many places, etc. > It's too late in the release cycle to adopt the Cuis' implementation > wholesale—particularly since Cuis doesn't pass the all the tests I > committed yesterday. (For example, #'_value' precedence answers 2.) > For 4.4 I'll be happy if we can make underscore selectors work without > having to patch the system before loading a package that contains > them. (eg Xtreams). I didn't suggest adopting the implementation in Cuis, just using a (maybe) good coding style. Adopting code from another fork requires a lot of care and testing to be sure of not breaking stuff. I know that. I do it quite often. WRT #'_value' precedence, it answers 2 if allowUnderscoreSelectors is false. The question is actually meaningless in this case, as #'_value' is not a valid selector... If you set the preference to true, it correctly answers 1. > Colin > > Cheers, Juan Vuletich |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Juan Vuletich (mail lists) <[hidden email]> wrote: > WRT #'_value' precedence, it answers 2 if allowUnderscoreSelectors is false. > The question is actually meaningless in this case, as #'_value' is not a > valid selector... If you set the preference to true, it correctly answers 1. The preference controls the behaviour of the scanner. That is, it controls whether 'a_b' in scanned as 1 token or 3 tokens. It should have no effect on precedence. Consider the case where you set #allowUnderscoreSelectors to true, load a package that contains them, then set the preference to false again. That's probably the common case; cf ConfigurationOfXtreams. Now you've got selectors containing underscores in the image, but the preference is set to false. Are those selectors invalid now? Is it meaningless to ask their precedence? No, those messags continue to work fine, and reflective code may well encounter selectors with underscores in them. Consider the following code: Smalltalk allSentMessages select: [:ea | ea isSymbol and: [ea precedence = 2]] Cuis will include #'_value' in the answer. Or how about this:
doesNotUnderstand: aMessage aMessage selector precedence = 2 ifTrue:
[Transcript show: 'Got an infix message!'] That kind of code may not be common, but it should work. Thanks for pointing me to Cuis' implementation. Digging into the details exposed a bug in my inelegant implementation as well—I had thought that binary selectors could contain underscores, but that's not the case. That implies that a single underscore is a unary message, not binary. Off to fix my test cases.
Colin |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
On 14 August 2012 18:18, Colin Putney <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 14, 2012 at 8:12 AM, Juan Vuletich (mail lists) > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> WRT #'_value' precedence, it answers 2 if allowUnderscoreSelectors is >> false. >> The question is actually meaningless in this case, as #'_value' is not a >> valid selector... If you set the preference to true, it correctly answers >> 1. > > The preference controls the behaviour of the scanner. That is, it controls > whether 'a_b' in scanned as 1 token or 3 tokens. It should have no effect on > precedence. Consider the case where you set #allowUnderscoreSelectors to > true, load a package that contains them, then set the preference to false > again. That's probably the common case; cf ConfigurationOfXtreams. Now > you've got selectors containing underscores in the image, but the preference > is set to false. Are those selectors invalid now? Is it meaningless to ask > their precedence? > > No, those messags continue to work fine, and reflective code may well > encounter selectors with underscores in them. Consider the following code: > > Smalltalk allSentMessages select: [:ea | ea isSymbol and: [ea precedence > = 2]] > > Cuis will include #'_value' in the answer. Or how about this: > > doesNotUnderstand: aMessage > aMessage selector precedence = 2 ifTrue: > [Transcript show: 'Got an infix message!'] > > That kind of code may not be common, but it should work. > > Thanks for pointing me to Cuis' implementation. Digging into the details > exposed a bug in my inelegant implementation as well—I had thought that > binary selectors could contain underscores, but that's not the case. That > implies that a single underscore is a unary message, not binary. Off to fix > my test cases. I'd noticed +_+. The only argument I can see _against_ such a thing is that +a+ is currently not a valid binary selector. frank > Colin > > > > > > |
Re: The Inbox: Collections-cwp.486.mcz
|
|
In reply to this post by Colin Putney-3
You're right Colin. Thanks for pointing this out. I just made an update for Cuis to address this. Cheers, Juan Vuletich Quoting Colin Putney <[hidden email]>:
Cheers, |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |