Sounds like a bad naming to me. I don't see why withIndexDo is any better. It even contradicts the order of the arguments. And it is Proprietary to Pharo.
Joachim > Am 10.03.2015 um 13:39 schrieb Sanjay Minni <s...@planage.com>: > > Yes usually I have to open the code and see, use intuition or write a sample > code to find out > incidentally here I also have to figure out which is the current and which is > the deprecated version ... well thats it > > sanjay > > > --- > Sanjay Minni > +91-9900-902902 > http://in.linkedin.com/in/sanjayminni > >> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Thierry Goubier [via Smalltalk] <[hidden >> email]> wrote: >> And one has to guess that elementAndIndexBlock means >> >> [:each :i | ... ] ? (and of course not [:i :each | ... ] ) >> >> I'm allways looking for senders with that type of code ;) arguments to >> blocks are usually not documented. >> >> Thierry >> >> 2015-03-10 13:27 GMT+01:00 Peter Uhnák <[hidden email]>: >>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Joachim Tuchel <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> #doWithIndex: ? >>> >>> doWithIndex: elementAndIndexBlock >>> "Use the new version with consistent naming" >>> ^ self withIndexDo: elementAndIndexBlock >> >> >> >> If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion >> below: >> http://forum.world.st/when-iterating-over-a-collection-how-to-determine-the-current-objects-index-tp4810920p4810931.html >> To unsubscribe from when iterating over a collection how to determine the >> current objects index, click here. >> NAML > > --- > Regards, Sanjay > > View this message in context: Re: when iterating over a collection how to > determine the current objects index > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
