Ok. Then we can have an ordered expression :) A sequence without a declaration is a bit useless. On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Damien Pollet <damien.pollet@gmail.com> wrote:

Surprising that a sequence is not an expression. I'm pretty sure that (1+2. 2+3) is an expression that returns 5 (after computing a useless addition). What is currently not an expression is the variable declaration, indeed. But if we make |d| an expression then that means we can declare variables in the middle of a sequence… so it would still have the same lifetime, but a shorter scope ?

On 30 June 2017 at 11:32, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:

...

I do not get why (Yes I know it is because it is not in the syntax.... but it is conceptually not nice).

| d | d := Dictionary new. d at: #top at: #below1 put: 1. d at: #top at: #below1 put: 2. d at: #top at: #below1.

is not an expression in Pharo.

It means that I can manipulate

1 + 3, x + 3 as an expression but not a sequence.

So it forces me to use a block to convert artificially a sequence in an expression.

[ | d | d := Dictionary new. d at: #top at: #below1 put: 1. d at: #top at: #below1 put: 2. d at: #top at: #below1. ] value

So if I want to build a repl executing expression then this is not a Pharo repl but just a stupid expression.

I would like to know what would be impact to have sequence and declaration as expression.

Stef

-- Damien Pollet type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet