Le 26/06/2014 18:11, Richard Sargent a écrit :
Esteban A. Maringolo wrote
If one thing confuses people in that realm is non arithmetic precedence: Eg. 2 + 3 * 4 = 20 instead of the "expected" 14.
And we're not going to change that either. It's not worthy, and I doubt if it is possible at all.
I'm probably late to the party with this reply. The primary reason for not changing this is that it would be incorrect. It comes down to intrinsic versus extrinsic meaning. A multiple operator has an intrinsic meaning: it means multiple. But a message name does not have intrinsic meaning (other than it is a good idea to have the name represent what it does). The meaning of a message is determined by the receiver. e.g. if PetitParser defines #* to mean "0 or more repetitions", what happens when someone has decided that it should be evaluated before #+?
Message sending precedence can only be defined in terms of the type of message: unary, binary (or infix), and keyword, since the interpretation of the message is the receiver's responsibility, not the compiler's.
You could do it, but then you would have to wire the smalltalk parser with additional data (binary messages precedence) that would have to add a way or another to your binary method definition. Thierry -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95