On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 7:52 AM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Clement
>
> can you open a bug entry so that we clean this situation?
>
>
What is the bug? You want to merge the two selectors and break
compatibility with frameworks using the removed one?


> Stef
>
> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:43 PM, Clément Bera <bera.clem...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > It seems the two methods have exactly the same behavior indeed.
> > valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray
> > valueWithEnoughArguments: anArray
> >
> > One was edited recently but I think it's only to change the comment,
> they're
> > both very old. My guess is that there are two for compatibility purpose
> (One
> > is the selector that is considered as the most relevant that should be
> used,
> > the other one is the one also present in other Smalltalks so we have it
> for
> > cross-Smalltalk librairies or something like that), but only one is
> really
> > needed. If you need only the concept for SOM-NS you can just implement
> one,
> > if you want to be compatible with different Smalltalk lib implement both.
> >
> > All use-cases of these methods I have found do not inject nils, they
> expect
> > the block to have a number of arguments of the block less or equal to the
> > number of parameters in the argument array. I would say they're used as
> > #cullWithArguments: but for some reason other selector names were
> preferred.
> >
> > Now, as you mentioned, these two methods are more than just
> > cullWithArguments: since they inject nils if there are not enough
> > parameters. To me it looks incorrect to do so because then while
> debugging
> > your code you will get issues due to those injected nils and it will be
> > tedious for the application programmer to track the problem down to these
> > two methods.
> >
> > There a few use-cases for nil injection though. Typically when changing
> > existing frameworks in multiple repositories, it may be that during the
> > update process the change to the caller is installed before the change of
> > the callee, and if the code is actually used (code in UI for instance),
> > injecting nils might avoid system break-down. Another use-case is for
> > compatibility with frameworks using the nil injection, but I can't find a
> > framework doing that right now.
> >
> > Honestly, I would not implement the nil injection, but maybe some one
> else
> > has a different point of view.
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 6:25 PM, Stefan Marr <smallt...@stefan-marr.de>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi:
> >>
> >> I am trying to understand the different between and perhaps origin of
> >> BlockClosure>>#valueWithPossibleArgs: and
> >> BlockClosure>>#valueWithEnoughArguments:
> >>
> >> I am trying to decide which of the two I need for SOMns.
> >>
> >> The first one has seen more recent changes, when looking at the Pharo
> 6.1
> >> download:
> >>
> >> valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray    —>  2/12/2017 StephaneDucasse
> >> valueWithEnoughArguments: anArray —>  3/11/2001 nk
> >>
> >> While they have rather different implementations, they seem to behave
> >> identically, as far as I could tell using the following example:
> >>
> >> blocks := {
> >>   [ { } ].
> >>   [:a | { a } ].
> >>   [:a :b | { a. b } ].
> >>   [:a :b :c | { a. b. c } ]
> >> }.
> >>
> >> blocks collect: [:b | b valueWithPossibleArgs: {1}].
> >> blocks collect: [:b | b valueWithPossibleArgs: {1. 2. 3}].
> >> blocks collect: [:b | b valueWithEnoughArguments: {1}].
> >> blocks collect: [:b | b valueWithEnoughArguments: {1. 2. 3}].
> >>
> >> I was also wondering how they relate to #cull:*
> >>
> >> One of the major differences seems to be that valueWithP* and
> valueWithE*
> >> are both injecting nil for absent arguments, while normal #value* and
> #cull*
> >> methods signal an error.
> >> Is there a specific use case why one wouldn’t want to be strict here as
> >> well, but instead inject nils?
> >>
> >> Any comments or pointer appreciated.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> Stefan
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Stefan Marr
> >> School of Computing, University of Kent
> >> http://stefan-marr.de/research/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clément Béra
> > Pharo consortium engineer
> > https://clementbera.wordpress.com/
> > Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq
>
>


-- 
Clément Béra
Pharo consortium engineer
https://clementbera.wordpress.com/
Bâtiment B 40, avenue Halley 59650 Villeneuve d'Ascq

Reply via email to