Hi sean just a question since I started to finally understand for real the multiple objects that closures represent :) Would it not make sense to have internally an object (not a closure) that represent a method and that answer the method value or value: You could save this object and on potentially even generate a block if needed. I do not think that in magritte we use the closuring aspect of closure we use them as anonymous method. Stef

On 5 Oct 2019, at 04:58, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:

While developing Magritte, I have a problem because blocks that are read/written to/from strings (e.g. via Magritte forms) have a different outerContext before and after and thus I don't know how (without an ugly hack) to determine whether they were changed by the user.

Question: Is there a smarter way to do block equality? Currently in Pharo block comparison is via #==. In Squeak, there is: BlockClosure >> #= aClosure self == aClosure ifTrue: [^true]. aClosure class = self class ifFalse: [^false]. (self method == aClosure method and: [startpc = aClosure startpc and: [self isClean]]) "<--- this line" ifTrue: [^true]. ^outerContext = aClosure outerContext and: [startpc = aClosure startpc]

Do you know if they have the new closure model because we are working to move to it.

I'm not totally sold on the implementation due to the `startpc = aClosure startpc` the first time it appears (in the comment-marked line). With it, in a workspace, the following is false: `[1] = [1]`, but removing that test makes it true. I'd like something that returns true if both blocks are clean and they "do the same thing". But I like the track it's on...

----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html