Ok, I commited a slice with a different selector name we discussed with Ben a while ago. #bindKeyCombination:toAction:
On Mon, Aug 5, 2013 at 9:42 AM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4 August 2013 15:50, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > > I would use #onKeyCombination:do: to keep coherency with the framework. > > > > why not naming it > onKeyCombinationInKeyBindingsFramework:do: > :) Really? > > OnKey: is good because it short. Short is not always better, come on igor! > And not ambiguous (you can use single > key(s) yes but also... *as well as key combinations*, And then why Key is ok? The role the object is playing there is the one of a key combination. If a key can be used as a key combination it is only circumstantial. > but that details). > You know better than a lot of people that details matter :). And now you can solve the detail instantaneously by just making the selector more intention revealing. I do not see the problem. > > > On Aug 4, 2013, at 3:04 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi ben and others > >> > >> we are introducing onKey:do: for bindings so that we can control the > complexity and the registration > >> of announcements. So if you can I have a look it would be good. > >> > >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?11299 > >> > >> Stef > > > > > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > >
