On Dec 10, 2013, at 5:09 PM, Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]> wrote:
> A threat? You're completely miss-understanding me, I was kidding ;) > it just that it gave me some time to answer you. > As long as it's your images, you're free man, implement whatever you like. > Weren't we speaking of incorporating some messages in trunk development? > Then you have to deal with other's opinion. Mine does not count that much. > At the end, anyway, Steph and Marcus decide. > > > 2013/12/10 Roberto Minelli <[email protected]> > > On Dec 10, 2013, at 4:19 PM, Nicolas Cellier > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Do I really need to respond to this? > > No. > > > Well you're lucky, my child not yet awoke: > > Is this a threat? :lol: > > > 1) size is often implemented O(1) above is O(n) > > 2) typing size is very short compared to open code you provided > > 3) size has many senders which makes it worth > > 4) size is part of ANSI > > Which of these points apply to (someCollection collectAsSet: #asUppercase) > > vs (someCollection collect: #asUppercase as: Set). > > Anyway, this is an endless discussion. You have your point. I have mine. I > have my own #collectAsSet: and I am fine with that and I will never use > #collect:as: > > > But you could find better example of some more questionable methods in > > Squeak/Pharo. > > > > 2013/12/10 Roberto Minelli <[email protected]> > > So if "self do: [:each | tally := tally + 1]" computes the size of a > > collection, why do we need the #size selector? > > > > On Dec 10, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > So if collect:as: does the job why the hell add yet another selector? > > > > > > > > >
