Yes :)
On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 4:21 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > > >> On 21 Apr 2018, at 15:35, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Oh yes!!!! >> >> On Sat, Apr 21, 2018 at 12:12 AM, Chris Cunningham >> <cunningham...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> A name like this would be clearer (although much more annoying): >>> >>> returnAtLeast: minValue butNoMoreThan: maxValue >>> 10 returnAtLeast: 12 butNoMoreThan: 48 > > why 'return' ? most methods return something. > > 10 atLeast: 12 butNoMoreThan: 48 > >>> Thanks, >>> cbc >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Hilaire <hila...@drgeo.eu> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Out of curiosity. >>>> >>>> I always found the #min:max: confusing and lost in its expressiveness. >>>> >>>> One should write: >>>> >>>> 10 min: 48 max: 12 >>>> >>>> to expect 12. >>>> >>>> but logically one (at least me) may want to express it as: >>>> >>>> 10 min: 12 max: 48 >>>> >>>> Then when reading its source code, it is even more confusing: >>>> >>>> min: aMin max: aMax >>>> ^ (self min: aMin) max: aMax >>>> >>>> Are not the argument names inversed in their meaning, if any? >>>> >>>> Hilaire >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dr. Geo >>>> http://drgeo.eu >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> > >
