maybe something in the direction of splitOnThresholds:? 2017-12-12 10:38 GMT+01:00 Pavel Krivanek <[email protected]>:
> 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 <thomas.dupriez@ens-paris- > saclay.fr>: > >> #(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 >>> >> >> >> >
