Hi Johan, That is nice indeed. It is good to see that you have fun learning Pharo Smalltalk.
Can you do it ? Of course, you can do what you want, Pharo Smalltalk is a highly flexible environment. Key to its simplicity are its ultra simple syntax which hits a magical optimum between simplicity and capability (full syntax on a postcard). With just messages and block, you can express almost anything (one limitation is that there are no macros). Part of that is (for me at least), left to right evaluation/reading - trying to change that 'hurts'. Binary operators are useful and even necessary, but the problem with totally new uses is that readers won't understand them. Being a bit more verbose helps, in my opinion. You might also be interested in the following: Lambda Calculus in Pharo Yes, the Y Combinator is useful in normal programs https://medium.com/concerning-pharo/lambda-calculus-in-pharo-a4a571869594 Regards, Sven > On 23 Oct 2019, at 15:12, main <johan_forsberg...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Hi again! > > Just putting it out there for anyone interested. > > What I did was define the following in Object: > > |> aBlock > ^ [ :x | x => self => aBlock ] > > and also: > > => msg > ^ msg value: self > > > This enabled me to compose like this (I know I probably violate every rule > in the book, whatever ): > > f := [ :x | x + 100 ]. > g := [ :x | x + 20 ]. > h := [ :x | x + 3 ]. > > 0 => (f |> g |> h). 123 > > Also tried using ~: > > 0 => (f ~ g ~ h). 123 > > It's just a matter of taste I guess, but for me it warms my heart > > > > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >
