> On 28 Oct 2014, at 11:23, Mark Rizun <mri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks. I see that, however RBBlockNode or RBArrayNode doesn't have tokens. > These classes have only methods in accessing-token protocol. > I think it would be better if we have token object for those classes, because > it makes more sense to hold such information in token object. >
No, actually we should get rid of tokens.. they are just used for parsing (the scanner produces tokens, there is no token for a block, as a block consists of many tokens… so conceptually, a block can not have a token). Tokens expose a very low level implementation artefact of the parser to the AST model, this is not good. There is… https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11992/Remove-tokens-from-the-AST-Core-Node-classes We should have a look at that and integrate it. This should simplify lots of things. Marcus
