Skip to main content

Smalltalk Challenge: Post 9 - Koans

Besides tinkering with turtles and hashes in Squeak, I secretly went back to GNU Smalltalk and went through some of the Smalltalk Koans. Sssh... don't tell Josh!

Programming koans are a series of failing unit tests that a student reads through and corrects. Each test demonstrates a particular concept in the language. They can be a fun way to review one's understanding of a language, and occasionally learn something new. Here's an of a koan:
testSingleCharacterFromString [
    | string |

    string := 'Smalltalk'.

    self expect: (self fillMeIn) toEqual: (string at: 1).
    self expect: (self fillMeIn) toEqual: (string at: 6).
]
When the test suite is run, it displays:
Do not lose hope.  Expected value should equal actual value.

Expected : FILL ME IN
Actual   : $S  (an instance of Character)

TestString#testSingleCharacterFromString has damaged your karma
(in src/koans/TestString.st)
The name of the method indicates it is possible access the characters that make up a string. The test shows how the at: message is passed to a string to obtain a character at the given index. The programmer must replace (self fillMeIn) with the correct value which will allow the test to pass and the student to proceed.
self expect: $S toEqual: (string at: 1).
self expect: $t toEqual: (string at: 6).
This demonstrates that in Smalltalk character instances are preceded by a dollar-sign, and indexes start at 1, not 0 as in many other languages.

Going through the koans, I thought the ones from TestString.st, TestMessage.st, and TestDictionary.st were exceptionally good. My favorite was this one from TestMessage.st, which demonstrates an unintuitive edge-case resulting from Smalltalk's everything-is-an-object and message passing philosophies.
testMessageCascading [
    | value |

    value := 3 + 2; * 100.  "';' separates each message sent to '3'"

    self expect: (self fillMeIn) toEqual: value.

    "Think about it: we are sending multiple messages to '3'."
]
The correct answer is 300. Pretty evil, eh?
Labels:

Comments

  1. skimJuly 3, 2011 at 2:20 PM

    Hey Timothy, thanks for the write up! Just want to say I recently updated the koans to avoid explicit self on fillMeIn. Now you only have to replace fillMeIn in the tests.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Timothy BoronczykJuly 5, 2011 at 12:45 PM

    You're welcome.., and thank you for the time and effort you put in to write some really awesome koans. I look forward to seeing your Squeak koans if/when you get around to them.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Writing a Minimal PSR-0 Autoloader

An excellent overview of autoloading in PHP and the PSR-0 standard was written by Hari K T over at PHPMaster.com , and it's definitely worth the read. But maybe you don't like some of the bloated, heavier autoloader offerings provided by various PHP frameworks, or maybe you just like to roll your own solutions. Is it possible to roll your own minimal loader and still be compliant? First, let's look at what PSR-0 mandates, taken directly from the standards document on GitHub : A fully-qualified namespace and class must have the following structure \<Vendor Name>\(<Namespace>\)*<Class Name> Each namespace must have a top-level namespace ("Vendor Name"). Each namespace can have as many sub-namespaces as it wishes. Each namespace separator is converted to a DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR when loading from the file system. Each "_" character in the CLASS NAME is converted to a DIRECTORY_SEPARATOR . The "_" character has no special ...
6 comments
Read more

Safely Identify Dependencies for Chrooting

The most difficult part of setting up a chroot environment is identifying dependencies for the programs you want to copy to the jail. For example, to make cp available, not only do you need to copy its binary from /bin and any shared libraries it depends on, but the dependencies can have their own dependencies too that need to be copied. The internet suggests using ldd to list a binary’s dependencies, but that has its own problems. The man page for ldd warns not to use the script for untrusted programs because it works by setting a special environment variable and then executes the program. What’s a security-conscious systems administrator to do? The ldd man page recommends objdump as a safe alternative. objdump outputs information about an object file, including what shared libraries it links against. It doesn’t identify the dependencies’ dependencies, but it’s still a good start because it doesn’t try to execute the target file. We can overcome the dependencies of depende...
Post a Comment
Read more

What's Wrong with OOP

Proponents of Object Oriented Programming feel the paradigm yields code that is better organized, easier to understand and maintain, and reusable. They view procedural programming code as unwieldy spaghetti and embrace OO-centric design patterns as the "right way" to do things. They argue objects are easier to grasp because they model how we view the world. If the popularity of languages like Java and C# is any indication, they may be right. But after almost 20 years of OOP in the mainstream, there's still a large portion of programmers who resist it. If objects truly model the way people think of things in the real world, then why do people have a hard time understanding and working in OOP? I suspect the problem might be the focus on objects instead of actions. If I may quote from Steve Yegge's Execution in the Kingdom of Nouns : Verbs in Javaland are responsible for all the work, but as they are held in contempt by all, no Verb is ever permitted to wander about ...
9 comments
Read more