If you are typing some javascript inside a squeak string, like:
'mumble("x"); grumble("*");'
there are subtle things that can go wrong. If you inadvertently type
mumble('x');
you'll get a compiler error, but if you type
grumble('*');
can you guess the result without actually running it?
Cheers, Bob
On 2013-08-31, at 20:28, Bob Arning arning315@comcast.net wrote:
If you are typing some javascript inside a squeak string, like:
'mumble("x"); grumble("*");'
there are subtle things that can go wrong. If you inadvertently type
mumble('x');
you'll get a compiler error, but if you type
grumble('*');
can you guess the result without actually running it?
Cheers, Bob
You mean
'grumble('*');'
I do have a guess indeed :)
- Bert -
Well, it appears to have been fixed in more recent released, but, yes something like
'mumble("x"); grumble('*');'
although with so much more stuff around it that you forget you are inside a squeak string.
Cheers, Bob
On 8/31/13 2:54 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
On 2013-08-31, at 20:28, Bob Arning <arning315@comcast.net mailto:arning315@comcast.net> wrote:
If you are typing some javascript inside a squeak string, like:
'mumble("x"); grumble("*");'
there are subtle things that can go wrong. If you inadvertently type
mumble('x');
you'll get a compiler error, but if you type
grumble('*');
can you guess the result without actually running it?
Cheers, Bob
You mean
'grumble('*');'
I do have a guess indeed :)
- Bert -
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 11:28 AM, Bob Arning arning315@comcast.net wrote:
If you are typing some javascript inside a squeak string, like:
'mumble("x"); grumble("*");'
I have a quasi-literal implementation that'll fix that ;-)
there are subtle things that can go wrong. If you inadvertently type
mumble('x');
you'll get a compiler error, but if you type
grumble('*');
can you guess the result without actually running it?
Cheers, Bob
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org