Whither SmallScript? (was Re: Integer micro-benchmarks)

[Dave Harris]

dnew at san.rr.com (Darren New) wrote (abridged):
> It's been too long since I used Smalltalk, but doesn't |f| inside a
> smalltalk block declare a block-local temporary, rather than an 
> argument? I
> thought it was something like
> 
>  [ f: g: |q r| code goes here ]
> that says "f" and "g" are arguments, q and r are temps?

Close. There's an extra bar and the colons go the other side of the 
variables.

   [ : f : g | |q r| code goes here]
   
It as if there were an invisible message selector keywords before the 
arguments. Compare with method definitions:

    with: f and: g
        |q r|
        code goes here

the "with" and "and" are part of the method's name, so the block is like 
an anonymous method.


> If I'm remembering right, I'd say it's a minor faux pas to use syntax 
> from Smalltalk and have it mean something subtly different.

Well, it's not like this part of Smalltalk is ideal.

  Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK | "Weave a circle round him thrice,
      brangdon at cix.co.uk      |   And close your eyes with holy dread,
                              |  For he on honey dew hath fed
 http://www.bhresearch.co.uk/ |   And drunk the milk of Paradise."