On 21 November 2013 19:10, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> wrote:
> > mm.. well, i prefer that fairly common would be to pass meaningful data > back and forth rather than > > dummy values. > I don't understand... when I say "fairly common", I mean that in the C > world, it seems common to use null-passing for optional arguments. I'm not > saying that it's a good idea, but we don't have control over that, so... > > if it would be just C world :) Another reason for not making this default, because checking for nil is one extra check for every piece of generated code which expects pointer, and i hope you agree that while null-value is fairly common, non-null is much more common. > > For that best solution, IMO, would be to use 2 methods which call same > function, > > but one uses 'nil' in function signature (and therefore method doesn't > takes extra argument), > > while other takes extra argument but doesn't accepts nils, for sure. > Yuck ;) but this is quite common in smalltalk isn't? Look at Canvas - good example of overusing it i.e.: drawThis: withThis: andThat: drawThis: withThis: andThat: andAlsoThis: drawThis: withThis: andThat: andAlsoThis: andAlsoThat: :) yes, sometimes it looks like unnecessary protocol bloating, but i think for our case it is well justified. > Cheers, > Sean > > ------------------------------ > View this message in context: Re: NativeBoost: Documentation Suggestion > and > Question<http://forum.world.st/NativeBoost-Documentation-Suggestion-and-Question-tp4720805p4724069.html> > > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list > archive<http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html>at > Nabble.com. > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
