[Pharo-project] #and:and:and: deprecated on 1.1, why?

Lukas Renggli renggli at gmail.com
Wed May 26 07:20:59 EDT 2010

> not right to me. I wanted to express the feeling that, for me, the one
> of the best things about Smalltalk is its readability in difference to
> C, which is very fast. The »new compiler optimize« both, anyway.

- The "New Compiler" does not yet work.

- The optimized #and:and:and: code never decompiled correctly.

- The exact semantics of #and:and:and: is not clear without knowing
how it is implemented.

- There are subtle semantic differences between "a and: [ b ] and: [ c
] and: [ d ]" and "a and: [ b and: [ c and: [ d ] ] ]" if the
conditions have side-effects.

- The #and:and:and: constructs are very confusing to newbies, I have
seen that numerous times.

- The use of #and:and:and: doesn't shorten code.

- #and:and:and: is not necessary from a language point of view.

- And most important for me: #and:and:and: is incompatible with the
rest of the world.


Lukas Renggli

More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list