If you��re looking for a short selector that doesn��t reveal meaning by using more words, I would borrow a term that is used elsewhere, like your ��destructure��. Various programming language communities have terms like ��expand��, ��unpack��, ��spread��, or ��splat�� for using a sequence as separate arguments. Maybe ��spread�� would work?��

��

On Sat, Mar 28, 2020 at 16:58 Christian Haider <christian.haider@smalltalked-visuals.com> wrote:

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 ;)