Do not know if this matters, but I'm seeing a copy of the definition of the definition smalltalk ANSI 1997 and xor: should receive both blocks and Booleans Ill trying send to you. On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 3:16 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Nov 18, 2010, at 6:58 PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
On Thu, 18 Nov 2010, Marcus Denker wrote:
On Nov 18, 2010, at 6:34 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
& | Â don't Do not cnfuse lazy and the others.
true xor: [false]
--> walkback.
false xor: [false]
--> [false]
There is a call to #value missing (which will keep it working with booleans, too, as they understand #value, too (returning self)).
That's a possible solution, but xor can't be lazy, so the block is just pointless.
So the question is if we do it for consistency... (between or:, and:, xor:. They are so close that it's strange to have different parameters for them.
On the negative side, it does cost a send of #value (quick return self) for the case that one calls it on a boolean...
    Marcus
-- Marcus Denker  -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.