On Apr 1, 2011, at 10:10 AM, Friedrich Dominicus wrote:

AxiNat <tibabenfortlapalanca@gmail.com> writes:

...

Hi Friederich, here's two simple optimizations:

#(#nul #soh #stx #etx #eot #enq #ack #bel #bs #tab #lf) withIndexDo: [:each :index | self class compile: each asString , ' ^ asciiField at: ', index asString.].

Array withAll: #(1 2 3) is equivalent to #(1 2 3), and if you're not going to use the array again, you don't even need to assign it to a variable :) Well I do not want the compile part with String

So you could override #doesNotUnderstand: and there check if someone sends a message #etx (and the others) and then return the value. (you then want to store the value in a dictionary keyed by the the message name). doesNotUnderstand: aMessage | dict | dict := (#(nul soh stx etx eot enq ack bel bs tab lf) collectWithIndex: [:elem :index | elem -> index]) asDictionary. ^dict at: aMessage selector ifAbsent: [^super doesNotUnderstand: aMessage]. But of course doesNotUnderstand: is always a bit magic... and should be used with care. As for strings stiched together: yes, *horrible*. And we plan to move on to something better soon. In general, I like the idea to have a reflective model of the structure of methods... When talking about code, we should not use string... the Quasi-Quoting from Helvetia is far better than string manipulation: http://scg.unibe.ch/research/helvetia/examples#168249369 That combined with a good AST should make these things much easier. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.