Herby Vojčík wrote > Hello! > > I've got this portion in my delegate: > > requestPayload ifNotNil: [ uuidKeys do: [ :each | > requestPayload at: each ifPresent: [ :s | > requestPayload at: each > put: (UUID fromString: s) ] ] ]. > responsePayload := self towergame clientSync: requestPayload. > responsePayload ifNotNil: [ uuidKeys do: [ :each | > responsePayload at: each ifPresent: [ :uuid | > responsePayload at: > each put: uuid asString ] ] ]. > > Now I would gladly use something like Dictionary >> > at:ifPresentTransform: aBlock. But it is not present, so I have two > choices: > > 1. Add it as extension method, but then it may clash if someone else > has similar idea.
I would make this choice. The extension is directly relevant to dictionary-ness, so an extenstion makes sense. But, I would go with a different name and a more familiar pattern: #transformAt:using: and #transformAt:using:ifAbsent:. You would use the latter, with an empty block for the #ifAbsent: keyword. The former, if you chose to implement it, would throw an /element not found/ exception if the key is not in the dictionary. I think it helps when the verb begins the behaviour name. Admittedly, there are numerous cases where the symmetry is more important, as with #at: and #at:put:. (But, probably because they are short.) > 2. Add private helper TowergameDelegate >> > dict:at:ifPresentTransform:, which is longer and needs additional self > receiver. > > Which is preferable? > > Herby -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Stylistic-question-private-helper-vs-extension-method-tp4959230p4959235.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
