On 25 June 2013 14:54, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2013-06-25, at 14:35, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 25 June 2013 14:00, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 25, 2013, at 1:36 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On 25 June 2013 13:29, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I really cannot believe that you can consider >>>>> >>>>> is: #string >>>>> >>>>> better programing than >>>>> >>>>> isString >>>>> >>>>> no matter the implementation, and no matter if you can still found >>>>> senders of #string... string programming (or symbol programing) is just >>>>> bad, bad, bad. >>>>> Is so bad that is axiomatic... I cannot even explain why... :) >>>>> >>>> >>>> you are highly subjective here. :) >>>> >>>> given two expressions: >>>> >>>> object isString >>>> and >>>> object is: #string >>>> >>>> to me they are equal in their beautiness or ugliness, if you like. >>> >>> with the difference that in one: >>> >>> 1) you has a clearer and more expressive message >>> 2) you have a simple message send with an immediate return (and not a >>> comparisson) >>> >>> and in the other... you don't. >>> >> >> But that's exactly the point: if you so bad, that end up using isXXXX >> pattern in your code, >> you have to pay extra price for it! >> See, you don't like it! This is intentional! So, you should think how >> to avoid using it, >> and be forced to write better code :) >> >> Consider #is:, like anti-method for anti-pattern.. >> but not as "a very useful method". >> Then everything will fit on its place in your mind! :) > > > so that's why you install so many NativeBoost methods on Object?? > > invest your motivation into athens and txtext that is way more productive...
i cannot, while [someone is wrong on the internet] :)) yeah.. i think this is enough. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
