If you have any thoughts on direction, I could take a look - I did the “dirty”
and reimplemented the methods like everyone else… but it really felt like I
shouldn’t have had to…
So my code looked a bit like this (where I should have used some sort of
visitor with my stream instantiated, or maybe I could pass through some block,
I think)
(exercise solutionClasses asSortedCollection: [ :a :b | a name <= b name ]) do:
[ :class |
(exercise exercisePackage extendsClass:
class)
ifTrue: [
class
exPrintOutExtensionsFor: exercise exercisePackage on: s ]
ifFalse: [
class exPrintOutOn: s ]
] ].
And then in ClassDescription I had methods like this (noticed I need to visit
the definition, the comments, the categories for class and instance etc.:
exPrintOutOn: aWriteStream
"Print a description of the receiver on aWriteStream."
aWriteStream
nextPutAll: '"-- #', self name, ' (class) --"'; cr; cr;
nextPutAll: self definition;
nextPut: $.; cr; cr.
self hasComment ifTrue: [
aWriteStream nextPut: $".
self comment trimBoth encodeDoublingDoubleQuotesOn:
aWriteStream.
aWriteStream nextPut: $"; cr; cr ].
self exPrintOutCategoriesFor: self class on: aWriteStream.
self exPrintOutCategoriesFor: self on: aWriteStream
> On 13 Jun 2019, at 08:26, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On 19 May 2019, at 19:23, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
>>
>> Hi - is there a way to iterate over all the code in a package (or class or
>> baseline) in a generic way (to pretty print out class definitions, and
>> methods - including extensions ).
>>
>> I was kind of hoping that with TonelWriter and Fileout and Critics that we
>> would have a generic visitor mechanism but it seems that all of them just
>> implemented it again - which misses a big opportunity for refactoring so
>> that when you want to reason/print/manipulate code - it would be more
>> straight forward.
>>
>> Is there anything/anyone addressing this ? Or maybe I’ve missed an obvious
>> trick somewhere?
>>
>
> I think we always wanted to add some default “visitor” style way of iterate
> over the structure…
>
> I will add this higher on my priorities, because it actually should be quite
> simple.
>
>
> Marcus
>
>
