Agree with intention revealing - #argumentsIn: would contract it a bit more (not sure the as strictly needed as we aren���t returning a result). And #argsIn: might be a bit too concise.

Like this proposal though.

Tim

On Sun, 29 Mar 2020, at 2:28 PM, Helge Nowak via Esug-list wrote:

intention revealing trumps brevity

Am Sonntag, 29. M��rz 2020, 00:58:49 MEZ hat Christian Haider <christian.haider@smalltalked-visuals.com> Folgendes geschrieben:


Not bad! Captures the semantics nicely.

Just a bit long

 


Von: Esug-list <esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org> Im Auftrag von Bert Freudenberg
Gesendet: Sonntag, 29. M��rz 2020 00:12
An: esug-list@lists.esug.org
Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] destructDo:


 

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 11:27 AM Pape, Tobias <Tobias.Pape@hpi.de> wrote:


What about

        ^stringsOfLine asComponentsIn: [:ignore :string2 :string3 :string4 |
                self produktbereich: string2 profitcenter: string3 bezeichnung: string4]

?

Best regards
        -Tobias


 

Agreed, "...In:" is better than "...Do" because the latter implies iteration in Smalltalk. (never mind ifNotNilDo: which broke the convention)

 

And since block arguments are called "arguments" how about

 

aCollection asArgumentsIn: [:arg1 :arg2 :arg3 | ... ]

 

- Bert -

 

PS: Happy Covid Bike Shedding ;)

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org