On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 11:30 +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > Since the field visitors are gone, reintroducing #visitNodeList:onMatch: > > and #visitArgumentList:onMatch: would be worthwhile again, but they need > > to either call visitNodeList:visitor:onMatch: or be mostly copies of one > > another, but for one selector. > > I'm losing you a bit, but I think this would please me a lot more. Can > you prepare the patch? (Sorry for the burden.)
It's no problem. However, do you mean you want the reintroduced methods
to call visitNodeList:visitor:onMatch:, or to be mostly copies of one
another?
I'll post a patch against the last version I have (which shouldn't
conflict, as it would be stuck in the middle of code you want to keep)
in 10 hours or so, after a good sleep.
> > I wish these sorts of things would be done by arguments, rather than
> > selectors :/
>
> Agreed (I think...).
I hate when interfaces split up concepts like visitNode: and
visitArgument: that subclassers will obviously want to continue matching
behaviors. It all trickles down when you write interfaces that wrap
those concepts. At one point in the refactoring, you could have a stack
like this:
accept*:
visitListField:ofNode:
visitCollectionField:visitor:ofNode:
visitListNode:onMatch:
visitListNode:visitor:onMatch:
visitNode:onMatch:
--
Stephen Compall
http://scompall.nocandysw.com/blog
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
