We already have #splitOn: with slightly different behavior: (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) splitOn: [ :each | each = 4])
So splitOnEach: and splitWhen: would be probably confusing 2017-12-12 10:34 GMT+01:00 Thomas Dupriez < [email protected]>: > #(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) splitWhen: [ :each | each = 4] > > > > Le 12/12/2017 à 10:23, Pavel Krivanek a écrit : > >> Hi, >> >> do you have some proposals for a better name for the message named >> #aggregateRuns? >> >> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >> >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3 5 6)). >> >> (#(1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 ) aggregateRuns: [ :each | each = 4]) >> >>> #(#(1 2 3) #(4) #(1 2 3) #(4) #(5 6)). >> >> ((1 to: 12) aggregateRuns: [ :each | (each \\ 3) = 0]) >> >>> #(#(1 2) #(3) #(4 5) #(6) #(7 8) #(9) #(10 11) #(12)). >> >> The current comment is: >> "Answer a new collection of the same species as the >> receiver with elements being collections (of the receiver >> species) containing those elements of the receiver >> for which the given block consecutively evaluates to >> the same object." >> >> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20864/add-examples-to-Sequ >> enceableCollection-aggregateRuns >> >> Cheers, >> -- Pavel >> > > >
