When I wrote "is not good English", I meant that "findAnagramsCandidates" sounds *horrible* to this native speaker of English. "findCandidateAnagrams" works.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2020 at 18:12, Richard O'Keefe <rao...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What is the receiver? There are two and only two relevant objects: > the word and the collection. > aCollection selectAnagramsOf: aString > aString anagramsIn: aCollection > would be good names. In a language that did not let you extend system > classes, > anagrams(of: aString, in: aCollection) > would be good, but Smalltalk is not such a language. > > 'findAnagramsCandidates:subject:' is intention-revealing, but is not > good English. > Well, maybe the intentions could be revealed a bit better. > What is the subject of an anagram? No idea. > What is an 'anagramsCandidate'? No idea. > What is the difference between an 'anagram' and an 'anagramCandidate'? > > <whatever> anagramsOf: aString in: aCollection > <whatever> selectFrom: aCollection anagramsOf: aString > > > On Mon, 6 Jan 2020 at 03:07, Roelof Wobben via Pharo-users > <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > > Hello > > > > In a earlier question I get a remark to think better about naming things. > > Now I did a challene where I have to find anagrams of a given word in a > > collection, > > > > So I did this : > > > > findAnagramsCandidates: aCollection subject: aWord > > | charBag | > > charBag := aWord asLowercase asBag. > > ^ aCollection > > reject: > > [ :word | (word sameAs: aWord) or: [ word asLowercase asBag > > ~= charBag ] ] > > > > > > is my naming here better or can i improved and if so how ? > > > > Regards, > > > > Roelof > > > >
