On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:31 PM, St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
yes now do not think that I'm implying that you are not able to implement a decompiler.
Now we have something else to do that dealing with the optimisation of a stupid method.
This is all my point.
Let us focus on the real problems. eliot is crying for caseOf: but we have 3 users.

Did you know that there are several uses of caseOf: in the Opal compiler? �Do you have such an encyclopaedic knowledge of all the packages ever written in Pharo and Squeak that you know* you have only 3 users? �Of course you don't. �You are being ridiculous.�


Stef


On Feb 16, 2011, at 9:23 PM, Marcus Denker wrote:

> Hi,
>
> What about postponing this dicussion to the week of the 7th of march? This will be far easier...
> (and I really did not have the energy to follow this discussion. Most of the emails in this thread I did
> not read).
>
> � � � Marcus
>
> On Feb 16, 2011, at 12:12 PM, St�phane Ducasse wrote:
>
>>
>> On Feb 16, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 11:17 PM, St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
>>> But it looks like a DSL to me.
>>>
>>> No its not. �caseOf: is valid Smalltalk. �It is another control structure defined in the library rather than by the language, just like do:, inject:into: et al. It is extremely useful in certain circumstances. �It can be (and is) optimized. �Functional languages support case statements that are conceptually similar. �caseOf: (and those of functional languages) are *much* more powerful than the switch statement of C: �caseOf: can dispatch on arbitrary values, not just integer indices; caseOf:'s selectors (the things on the left of the ->'s) can be expressions, not just constants.
>>>
>>> So caseOf: could be moved to Cog.
>>>
>>> Fine. �Let me be equally pig-headed then. I'm not going to spend any more energy on this, and I'm not going to spend any more energy on Cog in Pharo. �This is ridiculous.
>>
>> Then perfect be mad at me and take all the pharoers in prison. This is the only solution.
>> Since you have the power to do it and I cannot do anything about it. I let you choose if I'm a real assshole, a plain idiot
>> or just that I suggest something to ease our future.
>> what I suggest is to
>> � � �- stop inlining caeOf so that the transition path to OPAL is easier
>> � � �- let caseOf use for VMMaker.
>>
>> It would take 15 min to do that and probably 30 min to fix tools that are using caseOf: out of VMMaker.
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>
>
> --
> Marcus Denker �-- http://www.marcusdenker.de
> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
>
>