On Fri, 28 Dec 2018 at 16:30, Konrad Hinsen <konrad.hin...@fastmail.net>
wrote:
> Richard Sargent <richard.sarg...@gemtalksystems.com> writes:
>
> > I understand your desire to utilize the existing Smalltalk mechanisms.
> But,
> > I think the most important thing is modelling consistency.
> >
> > What are the behaviours you expect from Expression, SumExpression, and
> > ProductExpression? Do they know their parent expression? Their children?
> > Other things?
>
> I certainly agree that this should be the main consideration, but in my
> case that's done. Each Expression subclass stored its own specific
> information, which for leaf nodes such as integer expressions is really
> just a value. All I need is integers with added behavior.
>
> > I think that, in general, you will benefit from fully and consistently
> > modelling the parse tree.
>
> I should have mentioned that my Expressions are not parse trees. They
> are used as values in symbolic computation. They are constructed and
> deconstructed all the time, which is one reason I want to eliminate
> overhead, the other reason being clarity of code.
>
This may not be what you are looking for, but maybe help flesh out ideas.
Try debugging...
OpalCompiler new evaluate: '1 + 2'
cheers -ben
