On 27 January 2017 at 02:28, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:35 AM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 27 January 2017 at 01:30, Ben Coman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 6:02 AM, stepharong <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > On Thu, 26 Jan 2017 20:38:49 +0100, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> >> stepharong wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> can we rename this selector? > >> >>> asMethodConst should be at least be renamed to asConstantMethod > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> When you use "as {something}" then "something" depicts the result of > >> >> the > >> >> conversion message sent to an object. > >> >> > >> >> Like in #asNumber or #asString which shows to what the receiver will > be > >> >> converted. > >> > > >> > > >> > Yes I thought that it was doing that. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> My understanding is that in the case discussed the receiver object is > >> >> NOT converted to a constant unchangeable method, so #asConstantMethod > >> >> would > >> >> not fit as a selector. > >> >> > >> >> Instead it is sent to an object that afterwards is a constant within > a > >> >> method > >> >> (so it will not be evaluated later at runtime again) so IMHO > >> >> #asMethodConstant > >> >> instead of #asMethodConst would be better. > >> > > >> > > >> > I do not understand any of them. > >> > >> method constant = constant of a method > > > >> constant method = method that does not change > >> > > are you sure? > > pretty sure. 'method' is the subject. 'constant' is the adjective that > modifies the subject. > Its a bit hard to explain that intrinsic feeling of what is right, > but maybe.... If the adjective follows the subject its usually > separated by little joining words. > http://www.grammar-monster.com/glossary/adjective_definition.htm > > > maybe it is > > constant method = method that returns constant? > > For me this does not compute. > But I understand rules differ in other languages and its hard to avoid > subtle influences from your primary language. >
heh.. you see my pain! right now i have to deal with C++ and seeing all these const Type & foo const.. and cannot parse it.. :) And still, it could just be my personal bias. > So if you & Stef find it ambiguous, it may be for others and we should > aim to avoid that. > > Well, we have more general term for objects that do not change over their lifetime - immutable. And it is moare precise, if we're talking in smalltalk context. So, why borrowing rather alien term into our ecosystem, because i barely heard that anyone were using it, and saying something like 'constant object' or something like this, when talking smalltalk context. Because when you open this 'can' of constant method, what does it means being a constant? Is is that method's properties won't change, or all object(s) it is pointing to never change as well? > cheers -ben > > > > > apparently, that's why 'constant' term doesn't fits there, because > there's > > so many confusion about it. what are the constant in dynamic system, > after > > all? > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
