tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23912478.post114384401337352154..comments2024-01-03T12:45:39.815+00:00Comments on peripatetic axiom: Functional Style and Multiple Returnskeithbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14314542307822401015noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23912478.post-1147301269912880402006-05-10T23:47:00.000+01:002006-05-10T23:47:00.000+01:00Cliff,Firstly sorry for the delay in your comment ...Cliff,<BR/>Firstly sorry for the delay in your comment making it out here.<BR/><BR/>I think I prefer the first form. This may be because I've never done enough Smalltalk to get really comfortable with explicit answers in blocks, which I always have to stop and think about, albeit briefly. Does that count as a paradigm difference? I don't know.<BR/><BR/>Interesting that you describe Smalltalk as half-way between Scheme and the Algols. I see what you mean, but I tend more to think of Smalltalk and Scheme as "duals" or "inversions through the origin" of each other (or some similarly bogus geometrical analogy). And I probably really mean Common Lisp, Scheme isn't really dynamic enough to be that closely realted to Smalltalk, much as I love it.keithbhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14314542307822401015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23912478.post-1144787604420890792006-04-11T21:33:00.000+01:002006-04-11T21:33:00.000+01:00So, how does your perspective here apply to Smallt...So, how does your perspective here apply to Smalltalk, as a sort of halfway point between Scheme and the Algol languages? That is, do you see a paradigm difference in these two fragments:<BR/><BR/>^condition ifTrue: [ 5 ] ifFalse: [ 6 ].<BR/><BR/>condition ifTrue: [ ^5 ] ifFalse: [ ^6 ].<BR/><BR/>(I prefer the latter, in terms of locality of eyeball-reference...I find it clearer. But I'm curious on your take.)Cliff L. Bifflehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16279048507944234081noreply@blogger.com