Excellent decision Doru! Thanks!!!! Alexandre
On Oct 26, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Thanks everyone for the nice discussion.
So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc.
I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense. However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So, until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave room for playing.
In the meantime we have:
1. BlVector x: 10 y: 20 BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30
or:
2. (10@20) asBlocVector (10@20@30) asBlocVector
The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra object (the point).
An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive. This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix creation.
Cheers, Doru
On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Tudor Girba-2 wrote
You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :)
Ha ha, you got me ;)
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com
"Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be done."