oh! Thing, in this case, is just an object.. that extends Object.. where 'red_thing' is just a string..
so, myThing's key would just be a string.. that way, i could do something like myThing := Thing getByKey: 'red_thing' .. or myThing := Thing getByKey: 'blue_thing' yes, this will be a global thing.. >> Thing>>findOrCreateByKey: aKey >> ^Smalltalk at: aKey ifAbsentPut:[self createThingFor:aKey] i am not sure this is what i want to do.. i jus want to use the above to create a bunch of object.. then later, do something like: newThing := Thing findByKey: 'green_thing'. the above looks like i would have a nebulous 'key'.. and from there, i can use it to grab my instance of Thing. is that correct? oh! and asMutator is what i was looking for.. thanks so much! On Tue Jan 13 2015 at 1:07:42 PM Paul DeBruicker <pdebr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi - comments below > > > sergio_101 wrote > > During my daily work in another framework, we are able to do something > > very > > handy like so: > > > > myThing := Thing findOrCreateByKey: 'red_thing'. > > > > where the key is some underscored all lower case unique name for an > object > > we will be calling all the time. > > > > this will return either a new thing with a key of 'red_thing' or the > > current one that already exists. > > In your example above what type of object is Thing? > If the object stored at red_thing is to be a global then you'd want > > Thing>>findOrCreateByKey: aKey > ^Smalltalk at: aKey ifAbsentPut:[self createThingFor:aKey] > > Look at the senders/implementors of #at:ifAbsentPut: for other ideas e.g. > > Dictionary>>#at:ifAbsentPut: > > > > We can also do something like: > > > > myThing updateWithDictionary: aDictionary. > > > > and it will flip through the dictionary and assign values to the instance > > variables. > > MyClass>>updateWithDictionary: aDictionary > > aDictionary keysAndValuesDo:[:key :value| > self perform: key asMutator with: value]. > > > > > The above is very handy. > > > > I am currently creating a bunch of methods that populate my image with > > real > > objects, and could use these methods. > > > > My question is. Does a behavior like this already exist? If not, I'd like > > to add these methods to my project (in monticello). They will be used > with > > several different objects, so should I add the methods to Object? > > > > I would imagine this is something I would want to use a great deal. How > > would I go aobut making this something I could include easily in further > > projects? > > > > I realize that the 'updateWithDictionary' is very inefficient, but this > > will just be somethign that runs once, during data import, and never > > again. > > > > I just want to make sure I am not doing anything whacky. > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Object- > select-or-create-methods-tp4799266p4799384.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
