Richard O'Keefe wrote
> Seriously, sometimes it's worth it to write good code and then write
> glue code to the required interface.
Maybe "most of the time". Or "It's almost always worth it". Why practice
bad habits? We should reinforce writing good code -- there's not enough of
it out there.
I should have remembered that, seeing that I've done 41/42 of the
Pharo exercisms,
and am currently doing the F# ones in my spare time, which I have had
very little of
lately. I have started using the annotation in
such cases to
remind me not to fix the code. Looking back at my solution, I see
t
richard, fwiw Roeloff mentioned earlier that the message-name was provided by
the exercise set he's following, and isn't of his invention:
http://forum.world.st/is-this-better-regarding-naming-thigs-tp5109389p5109471.html
. he sh/could fwd your note/s to the course-author ;)
--
Sent from: http:/
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 wrote:
>
> What is the receiver? There are two and only two relevant objects:
> the word and
I've always considered "all objects respond to #value" as a bug.
It certainly is not portable: it wasn't in Smalltalk-80, or Apple Smalltalk,
or ANSI Smalltalk, and it isn't in GNU Smalltalk or Dolphin Smalltalk or
VisualWorks. It's a peculiarity of Squeak/Pharo and Smalltalk/X.
This is a misfeatu
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
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks.
I have missed that one.
Thanks for pointing it to me.
Roelof
Op 6-1-2020 om 13:13 schreef xap:
Here's the permalink to Sven's response (in case it still isn't visible to
you):
http://forum.world.st/is-this-better-regarding-naming-thigs-tp5109389p5109392.html
-
Here's the permalink to Sven's response (in case it still isn't visible to
you):
http://forum.world.st/is-this-better-regarding-naming-thigs-tp5109389p5109392.html
--
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
--- Begin Message ---
Op 6-1-2020 om 09:34 schreef xap:
hi Roelof, i didn't mean to hijack your thread, sorry -- my question was
directed at you, then kinda took on a life of its own.
That said, Sven had/has responded to your op (original post), no?
One additional change I would make: rename "f
hi Roelof, i didn't mean to hijack your thread, sorry -- my question was
directed at you, then kinda took on a life of its own.
That said, Sven had/has responded to your op (original post), no?
One additional change I would make: rename "findAnagramsCandidates" -->
"findAnagrams" : it's shorter,
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
Nice to see that someone who ask another question on my question but do
i get a answer on my question too.
So if the naming is better now.
Roelof
Op 6-1-2020 om 02:18 schreef xap:
"but all objects respond to value..."; thx, Santiago -- that makes more
sense, th
"but all objects respond to value..."; thx, Santiago -- that makes more
sense, that or: cares only about its receiver/argument evaluable as a
Boolean, no matter they started as blocks, expressions, or something else
(makes me wonder if a bare-value is a degenerate case of a block ... but
don't mind
It's better (conceptually and in performance) to use the inner block, but
is not always necessary. The #or: message sends the `value` message to it's
collaborator if the bolean is false. Blocks responds to value executing
theirs code, but all objects respond to value since it's defined in the
Objec
thx Rixhard. looks like or: takes an 'alternativeBlock', i.e. a block.
however substituting a parenthesized expression (or what i assume is one) as
I did before, in place of the inner block, w/ no other changes has the
method continue to work as expected, hence my question. *shrug* i need to
rtfm :
On Sun, Jan 5, 2020, 15:51 xap wrote:
> hi, I'm just starting out w/ pharo and have a question re your code;
> specifically, in
>
> reject:
> [ :word | (word sameAs: aWord) or: [ word asLowercase asBag ~=
> charBag ] ]
>
> is that inner block needed? would it be less smalltalk-esque
hi, I'm just starting out w/ pharo and have a question re your code;
specifically, in
reject:
[ :word | (word sameAs: aWord) or: [ word asLowercase asBag ~=
charBag ] ]
is that inner block needed? would it be less smalltalk-esque to write, say:
reject:
[ :w | (w = aWor
> On 5 Jan 2020, at 15:06, Roelof Wobben via Pharo-users
> wrote:
>
>
> From: Roelof Wobben
> Subject: is this better regarding naming thigs
> Date: 5 January 2020 at 15:06:18 GMT+1
> To: Any question about pharo is welcome
>
>
> Hello
>
> In a earlier question I get a remark to think b
--- Begin Message ---
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 as
18 matches
Mail list logo
