I don't think so but right now is interpreted as: #B. Do we want this behavior?
On 29 May 2013 16:30, Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't think so but right now is interpreted as: #B. Do we want this behavior?
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12? (I doubt we want comments within a token! self fo"this is a very long comment obscuring a simple message send"o !) frank
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations... I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799 2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com>
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
I see no harm in that. It might be misleading, but who in his/her sane mind would write like that? Apparently the parser removes all the comments before doing anything else. Esteban A. Maringolo 2013/5/29 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>
Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799
2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com>
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
On 29 May 2013 19:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I see no harm in that.
It might be misleading,
Well, that's _exactly_ the harm in that. frank
but who in his/her sane mind would write like that?
Apparently the parser removes all the comments before doing anything else.
Esteban A. Maringolo
2013/5/29 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>
Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799
2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com>
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
On 29 May 2013 20:55, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 May 2013 19:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I see no harm in that.
It might be misleading,
Well, that's _exactly_ the harm in that.
so don't write it like that :) I actually like the fact that i can put comment anywhere i want, and it doesn't disrupts the parser. Of course, it turns to be a problem, when you think that something must be represented by a single token but it cannot, because it split by comment. But to me it is much more important that i can put comment anywhere i like, without thinking "oh.. it may not compile".
frank
but who in his/her sane mind would write like that?
Apparently the parser removes all the comments before doing anything else.
Esteban A. Maringolo
2013/5/29 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>
Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799
2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com>
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On 29 May 2013 21:09, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 May 2013 20:55, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com> wrote:
On 29 May 2013 19:43, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com> wrote:
I see no harm in that.
It might be misleading,
Well, that's _exactly_ the harm in that.
so don't write it like that :)
Sure, but that's the inverse of the problem. The problem isn't that _you_ can write a comment anywhere. It's that when you're reviewing my code _I_ can put a comment anywhere, and make your day that little bit worse. One answer to that is a lint rule, I suppose, and then you reject my submission because I did some crazy nonsense with comments.
I actually like the fact that i can put comment anywhere i want, and it doesn't disrupts the parser. Of course, it turns to be a problem, when you think that something must be represented by a single token but it cannot, because it split by comment.
Exactly, which makes parsing that little bit worse.
But to me it is much more important that i can put comment anywhere i like, without thinking "oh.. it may not compile".
I suppose that's fine for hacking around. I just wouldn't want to review code with these kinds of comments in it. QA's hard enough already. frank
frank
but who in his/her sane mind would write like that?
Apparently the parser removes all the comments before doing anything else.
Esteban A. Maringolo
2013/5/29 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>
Ah, nice, we can write in french ;) 221" millions "355" mille "799
2013/5/29 Gisela Decuzzi <giseladecuzzi@gmail.com>
2013/5/29 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar@gmail.com>
How does 1"sdads"2 evaluate? To 12?
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
I think this shouldn't be valid but since there are tests verifying the behavior maybe there was a reason (more than the scanner we are using is skipping all the comments without letting the parser decide)
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
If #"whatever"symbol evaluates to #symbol, 123"blabla"456 doesn't parse in my image. Anyway, the first seems quite useless to me just like this other cases (also covered by test) like: ## # ## # # ## # asd that evaluates to #asd and: #123.456 that evaluates to 123.456 Camille
Ha ha, a long time weirdness http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-May/104250.html http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-May/116956.html 2013/5/29 Camille Teruel <camille.teruel@gmail.com>
Yes the same... 1"sdads"2 is interpreted as 12 and all estrange combinations...
If #"whatever"symbol evaluates to #symbol, 123"blabla"456 doesn't parse in my image. Anyway, the first seems quite useless to me just like this other cases (also covered by test) like: ## # ## # # ## # asd that evaluates to #asd and: #123.456 that evaluates to 123.456
Camille
participants (6)
-
Camille Teruel -
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Frank Shearar -
Gisela Decuzzi -
Igor Stasenko -
Nicolas Cellier