Hi Tim, I think that the „as” is essential and asArgsIn: would read as nice… Von: Esug-list <esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org> Im Auftrag von Tim Mackinnon Gesendet: Sonntag, 29. März 2020 16:24 An: esug-list@lists.esug.org Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] destructDo: 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. März 2020, 00:58:49 MEZ hat Christian Haider <christian.haider@smalltalked-visuals.com <mailto: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 <mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org> > Im Auftrag von Bert Freudenberg Gesendet: Sonntag, 29. März 2020 00:12 An: esug-list@lists.esug.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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@lists.esug.org <mailto:Esug-list@lists.esug.org> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org _______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org <mailto:Esug-list@lists.esug.org> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org