[squeak-dev] Q: Value of just the period, in method body resp. block body

>
>
> I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can  
> then also be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want  
> to include these two cases as well.
>
> TIA.
>
> /Klaus
>
> --
> "If at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it".  
> Albert Einstein
>
>
>

> Quick, what does this method return:
>
> MyClass>>myMethod.
>
> and what does this method's block return:
>
> MyClass>>myBlock
>
>  ^[.]value
>
> I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then also
> be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these
> two cases as well.
>

> 2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel <[hidden email]>:
>> Quick, what does this method return:
>>
>> MyClass>>myMethod.
>>
>> and what does this method's block return:
>>
>> MyClass>>myBlock
>>
>> ^[.]value
>>
>> I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can  
>> then also
>> be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include  
>> these
>> two cases as well.
>>
>
> mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything.
> i'd rather test following:
>
> ^ [42] value
> vs
> ^ [42 . ] value
>
> A period is designating an end of expression , right?
> For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but
> [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.

>
> On 27.11.2008, at 15:40, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>
>> 2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel :
>>> Quick, what does this method return:
>>>
>>> MyClass>>myMethod.
>>>
>>> and what does this method's block return:
>>>
>>> MyClass>>myBlock
>>>
>>> ^[.]value
>>>
>>> I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then  
>>> also
>>> be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include  
>>> these
>>> two cases as well.
>>>
>>
>> mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything.
>> i'd rather test following:
>>
>> ^ [42] value
>> vs
>> ^ [42 . ] value
>>
>> A period is designating an end of expression , right?
>> For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but
>> [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
>
> Because the . after the final statement in a block or method is optional.

>
> On 27.11.2008, at 15:40, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>
>> 2008/11/27 Klaus D. Witzel <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>> Quick, what does this method return:
>>>
>>> MyClass>>myMethod.
>>>
>>> and what does this method's block return:
>>>
>>> MyClass>>myBlock
>>>
>>> ^[.]value
>>>
>>> I'm writing compiler tests for CorruptVM/Moebius (tests that can then
>>> also
>>> be used with Squeak's compiler and NewCompiler) and want to include these
>>> two cases as well.
>>>
>>
>> mmm.. i think this test case is not qualifying anything.
>> i'd rather test following:
>>
>> ^ [42] value
>> vs
>> ^ [42 . ] value
>>
>> A period is designating an end of expression , right?
>> For me its more interesting, why in ["empty"] blocks returns nil, but
>> [ 42. "empty" ] block returns 42.
>
>
> Because the . after the final statement in a block or method is optional.
>