Look like #ifNotEmpty: is the correct choice.
Collection methods select: [ :m |
(m selector includesSubstring: 'if' caseSensitive:
false) and: [
m selector includesSubstring: 'empty'
caseSensitive: false
]
]
thenCollect: [ :m | m -> m senders size ]
"{
Collection>>#ifEmpty:->188.
Collection>>#ifNotEmpty:->113.
Collection>>#ifNotEmptyDo:ifEmpty:->0.
Collection>>#ifEmpty:ifNotEmpty:->80.
Collection>>#ifEmpty:ifNotEmptyDo:->0.
Collection>>#ifNotEmptyDo:->0.
Collection>>#ifNotEmpty:ifEmpty:->14
}"
Best regards,
Henrik
From: Pharo-users [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of
Peter Uhnák
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 6:55 PM
To: Pharo Users List <[email protected]>
Subject: [Pharo-users] ifNotEmpty(Do):
Collection>>ifNotEmpty: comment says
"If the block has an argument, eval with the receiver as its argument,
but it might be better to use ifNotEmptyDo: to make the code easier to
understand"
yet when I do that, Code Critic complains:
ifNotEmptyDo: should not be used as ifNotEmpty: works for blocks with
arguments, too.
1) who is right? what should I use?
2) shouldn't one be deprecated then? (or maybe one of them is to be compatible
with other smalltalks?)
Thanks,
Peter
