2009/8/19 Ken.Dickey <Ken.Dickey@whidbey.com>:
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com>
Stef, is this an invitation to continue discussion? From ISSUE 1072: Â Â http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=1072 ==============================================
The intent is that this issue, 1072, introduces some problems which motivate SLICE-remove-Complex.
I intend to open two new issues to be paired with (unreleased) SLICE-basic-Complex and SLICE-extended-Complex.
So I would prefer people to hold back discussions of other issues than removal of Complex code until I open those issues.
Baby steps. OK? ==============================================
So, this is an invitation to the discussion "Should the Complex class and associated code be removed from Pharo-Core?".
This is NOT an invitation to a discussion of what is reasonable in an optional Complex package.
...
I don't want to be peevish here, but things like:
Note that there is no attempt to change oddities of Smalltalk syntax. E.g. Â (3 + 1/2i) --> Â (0 - 2i) Â NOT Â (3 + (1/2)i)
indicating that Ken don't realizing completely what is Smalltalk.
I indicated that I know the Smalltalk syntax by knowing that  (3 + 1/2i) -->  (0 - 2i) and indicating I would _not_ change that.
Smalltalk syntax is certainly confusing to people which come from other languages which parse 1/2i as a number, which is why I pointed it out -- for people who don't know the Smalltalk parse strategy.
I presume that you _do_ want users to switch to Smalltalk from other languages! Â Yes?
sure i want. I had discovered smalltalk maybe 4 years ago. Before that i knew nothing about smalltalk but already had a programming experience more than a 15 years. But i never, never had a thought to call smalltalk syntax odd. It is most simple & consistent computer language syntax ever designed. I having much more reasons to call a math precedence rules odd, because they are many and you need to learn them and you spending a countless hours in school to learn them. If you remember your childhood - how many pupils (including you) , who had to study math found the math precedence rules odd, confusing and hard to grok them? Compare Roman numeric system with Arabic. Why do you think, a middle-age Europeans and then whole world started using Arabic numeric system instead of Roman? The problem here is with a pattern which sits deep in your brains and preventing you to understand a much more simpler and easy to master concept(s).
-KenD
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.