After thinking about this message some more, it seemed to me that it was easier to come up with a good intention-revealing name if the block were the receiver and the array were the argument. It would be some kind of #valueWithArguments: selector. So I looked to see whether there was already such a thing, and sure enough, in Pharo there is #valueWithPossibleArgs:. #valueWithPossibleArgs: will accept arrays (and I hope any SequenceableCollection) of any size -- trimming the end off if too large, padding with nils if too short. On the principle of "if it's easy to come up with a good name, the design is probably pretty good" could this possibly be a better solution? Regards, -Martin On 3/29/20 7:50 AM, Bruce Badger wrote:
We write code once, but read it many times. Given the relatively few times I would be using this (rather nice) thing, I'd be happy to type the full:
asArgumentsIn:
Christian, congratulations on coming up with something to get us all thinking and talking. Good timing too :-/
Very best wishes, Bruce
On Sun, 29 Mar 2020 at 15:24, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
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
_______________________________________________ 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 http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org