Anonymous | Login | 02-25-2021 05:07 UTC |
Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs |
Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | |||||||||||
ID | Category | Severity | Reproducibility | Date Submitted | Last Update | |||||||
0006352 | [Squeak] Collections | text | always | 03-21-07 11:51 | 07-23-07 20:56 | |||||||
Reporter | Damien Cassou | View Status | public | |||||||||
Assigned To | ||||||||||||
Priority | normal | Resolution | open | |||||||||
Status | new | Product Version | ||||||||||
Summary | 0006352: [ENH] PositionableStream>>peekFor: is not ANSI | |||||||||||
Description |
Here is a comment that should be added on PositionableStream>>peekFor: "This definition does not conform to ANSI standard but most smalltalk implements use this definition and it is more useful. ANSI definition of #peekFor: is just an equality test between the object peeked up and the parameter." Attached patch correct this. |
|||||||||||
Additional Information | ||||||||||||
Attached Files |
![]() |
|||||||||||
|
![]() |
|
(0010920 - 458 - 506 - 1124 - 1124 - 1124 - 1124) nicolas cellier 07-23-07 20:12 edited on: 07-23-07 20:13 |
Please, don't do it! Oops, sorry, please do it! didn't see it was only a comment! Following thread on squeak-dev clearly gave a large consensus that ANSI must be wrong with this case - except Ron and Damien; see: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-February/114407.html [^] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-March/114419.html [^] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2007-March/114442.html [^] |
(0010924 - 144 - 144 - 144 - 144 - 144 - 144) Damien Cassou 07-23-07 20:56 |
I now agree that this method is useful. However, I still think the name is incorrect. Changing the name has not been approved. Thus the comment. |
Mantis 1.0.8[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2007 Mantis Group
44 total queries executed. 29 unique queries executed. |