> Infinite recursion ? > > You use #ifTrue: in your implementation of Object>>#ifTrue: > > Plus, non-booleans cannot meaningfully respond. > > How would you define the semantics of > > 123 ifTrue: [ ... ]
123 is not "true", so, ignore the block. Do the ifTrue block only if the receiver is instance of True (true). Everything else is not "true" :) I missed the recursion, yes, but it could be done another way. > > > On 19 Mar 2018, at 10:18, Petr Fischer <petr.fisc...@me.com> wrote: > > > > Hello, I have some sort of philosophical question about ifTrue:/ifFalse: > > implementation. > > > > Now, ifTrue: is defined in the Boolean class (subclassResponsibility) + in > > True and False classes, so, we can send this message to the boolean > > expressions (instances) only, otherwise DND occurs. > > > > But we can also define one universal ifTrue: right in the Object class, in > > this style: > > > > Object>>ifTrue: .... > > (self = true) ifTrue: [ ... ]. > > > > then, we can send ifTrue: message to ANY object and it will work correctly > > without DND exception on non-boolean objects. > > > > Is something bad about this idea? > > > > Thanks! pf > > > >
