[Pharo-dev] , for vector creation
btc at openinworld.com
Thu Oct 26 23:29:58 EDT 2017
On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:45 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor at tudorgirba.com> wrote:
> Thanks everyone for the nice discussion.
> So, after all arguments, we will remove Number>>, from Bloc.
> I think using Number>>, for vector creation makes quite some sense.
> However, we have already seen that we have a few places where we have
> vectors: Bloc, PolyMath and Moose-Algos. The Bloc needs are smaller than
> the needs from PolyMath (we need only a limited set of abilities). So,
> until we have one consensus of having one vector in the image, we can leave
> room for playing.
> In the meantime we have:
> BlVector x: 10 y: 20
> BlVector x: 10 y: 20 z: 30
> (10 at 20) asBlocVector
> (10 at 20@30) asBlocVector
> The 2nd option reads ok, but it has the downside that it needs an extra
> object (the point).
Would it be possible/desirable to have this as a single primitive backed
Perhaps a goal for the consensus on one-true-vector form integrated into
Except at the moment "@:" doesn't parse.
> An interesting thing about Number>>@ is that it is backed by a primitive.
> This can be quite relevant and I think it would be worthwhile thinking
> about vector/matrix specific optimizations as well. That is why, in the
> future, it would be interesting to consider primitives for vector/matrix
> > On Oct 26, 2017, at 5:10 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean at clipperadams.com>
> > Tudor Girba-2 wrote
> >> You mean like sending @ to a number, right? :)
> > Ha ha, you got me ;)
> > -----
> > Cheers,
> > Sean
> > --
> > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.
> "Not knowing how to do something is not an argument for how it cannot be
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-dev