Thanks for your quick reply.
OK, your chapter highligths the polymorpism not the inheritance.
So I will try to change the Number methods in a dedicated image...
Anyway, in the book InsideSmalltalk P. 250, it explains that (I quote)
I suppose the "Number" mecanism is more complex than I can expe
Yes I know this article.
For the book I was trying to get an example that I can just add as an
extension of a previous exercise.
And I like it.
On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 9:33 PM, Yves Lenfant wrote:
> I start understanding better, I found this topic in the SmalltalkWithStyle
> book p. 107
> This t
The code of Pharo for + **may** be rewritten using double dispatch but
it is not that clear to me
especially the adaptToInteger logic and we do not change for the sake of it :)
There are plenty of places we should improve and that are really important.
In Pillar, or compiler we have many more node
I start understanding better, I found this topic in the SmalltalkWithStyle
book p. 107
This technic was explained by Dan Ingalls in
[Ingalls 86] Ingalls, D. A Simple Technique for Handling Multiple
Polymorphism.
347-349, Proceedings of OOPSLA '86, Portland, Or., ACM SIGPLAN 21(11).
1986
That you c
Ooops I wasn't int the mailing list, lets try again
Hello Steph,
I have questions about the concept because,probably, I miss something.
I am not sneaky, let me explain.
If we analyse the Kernel Numbers package, and we dissect the relation
between Float, Fraction and Integer (Pharo 5.0) for e
On August 23, 2017 10:09:02 PM GMT+02:00, Stephane Ducasse
wrote:
>On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
>> Maybe in general sumWithFoo: => addSelfToFoo: to make clues clearer.
>
>I see now it should be more
>addSelfWithFoo: or sumSelfWithFoo: because we do not modify the argume
a die handle is a group of dice as in 2D20.
I'm not sure that I want to explain what is double dispatch up front.
I want to go from the requirements to the solution
How to add
die (6) + die(5)
die (6) + 2D20
2D20 + die(6)
2D20 + 2D10
Without doing a self class == Die
Stef
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
> Maybe in general sumWithFoo: => addSelfToFoo: to make clues clearer.
I see now it should be more
addSelfWithFoo: or sumSelfWith: because we do not modify the argument.
Stef
Tx I will read your point carefully.
On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 9:20 PM, Herby Vojčík wrote:
> Maybe in general sumWithFoo: => addSelfToFoo: to make clues clearer.
>
> Herby
>
>
Maybe in general sumWithFoo: => addSelfToFoo: to make clues clearer.
Herby
Stephane Ducasse wrote:
feedback is welcome
Good reading
2.4
"is to explicit type check"
- "is to explicitly type check", or
- "is to do explicit type check"
s/we will haveother/we will have other/
s/distabilizing/destabilizing/
"In fact we just to tell the receiver ,,,"
I read it once without knowing what double dispatch is, after reading it ,
I did not know what double dispatch is. It took several reads to understand
what double dispatch is.
My suggestion is starting with explaining as a summary what double dispatch
is , instead of leaving it for the conclusion,
12 matches
Mail list logo
