Nobody seems to have an immediate reason that it is good to keep, I propose to
just remove that rule:
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/11164
<https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/11164>
(PR in need of a review!)
> On 9 May 2022, at 15:12, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I have never seen ReToDoRule to suggest a change that I wanted to do.
>
> I think it tries to detect if there is #at: send to the collection inside the
> block and suggests to use more high-level iterators.
>
> But the suggestions are odd and it seems to be too naive with just detecting
> the #at: message send to the iterated value.
>
> "Checks for use of to:do: when a do:, with:do: or timesRepeat: when should be
> used.”
>
> • #timesRepeat: does not take an argument for the block with the
> running index, so it is not a replacement
> • with:do: is not a replacement for to:do: ? it would mean creating
> first a collection and then iterating
> • using do: on an interval is bad, we even have a rule against that:
> ReUnoptimizedToDoRule
>
>
> Maybe I am missing something?
>
>
> The rule ReToDoCollectRule seems to be working nicely, though.
>
> Issue tracker entry: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/11162
>
>
>
