2017-11-07 13:47 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <[email protected]>: > 2017-11-07 13:11 GMT+01:00 Thierry Goubier <[email protected]>: > >> >> Now, if you explained me something like that: >> >> people nilFirst ascending >> >> Then I'd be more convinced. Or even >> >> people sorted nilFirst ascending (if one would prefer restricting the >> implementations of #nilFirst). >> > > I think we can easily support it. But of course it will work only for > objects which understand #threeWayCompareTo:. Now it looks like > > #(one nil two) sorted: #yourself ascending undefinedFirst. > > And I prefer this version instead of extending collection with new sorting > messages. >
My position is that we have few messages (which are not business logic related) for sorting, so they could easily extend collection (and #yourself here is just noise). Now, you want to keep that mix of business logic + ordering, hence the syntax you're choosing. Thierry
