_______________________________________________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.TimOn Sun, 29 Mar 2020, at 2:28 PM, Helge Nowak via Esug-list wrote:intention revealing trumps brevityAm 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 FreudenbergGesendet: Sonntag, 29. M��rz 2020 00:12Betreff: 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 mailing list
Esug-list@lists.esug.org
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org