Yes, I got to do it (so he could help in a small way) - 
https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/2939

And I annotated it.

Tim

Sent from my iPhone

> On 20 Mar 2019, at 20:08, ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Hi tim
> 
> Can you report it precisely because right now it is not actionable. 
> And yes doing something is a challenge. Doing nothing is much more 
> confortable because nothing breaks, and you die relaxed. 
> 
> Stef
> 
>> On 20 Mar 2019, at 20:17, Tim Mackinnon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> Ironically - one of my Exercism testers hit an issue with extract method 
>> about when you typed this... it’s seems there has a difference between 
>> “Suggestions | Extract method”  and “Source Code | Extract method” sigh... 
>> the former gives a walk back ... and it’s due to a strange misspelled 
>> variable “previousSelectionHighligth” not being initialised.
>> 
>> So yeah - this all needs testing and fixing.
>> 
>> Tim
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>>> On 20 Mar 2019, at 17:16, ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi
>>> 
>>> to relax I was going over RB code because we will start to improve the 
>>> refactoring. 
>>> And I started to add tests (yes the dummy little things that everybody can 
>>> write but 
>>> that most people prefer to think they do and talk about). 
>>> And writing such super super stupid tests
>>> 
>>> testCheckInvalidMethodName
>>>  "Usually used to validate input."
>>> 
>>>  self deny: (RBCondition checkMethodName: 'fofo fo').
>>>  self deny: (RBCondition checkMethodName: '123fofo').
>>>  "self deny: (RBCondition checkMethodName: 'foo::')."
>>>  "self deny: (RBCondition checkMethodName: 'agr:goo:aa').”
>>> 
>>> 
>>> checkMethodName: aString
>>>  "Return whether the argument aName is can represent a selector"
>>> 
>>>  ^ aString isString and: [ RBScanner isSelector: aString ]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I found that RBScanner reports that 
>>> 
>>> #foo:: or 'agr:goo:aa’ is a valid selector :(
>>> 
>>> So if you **really** want to help pharo this is not that difficult. 
>>> 
>>> Now this is a matter of will. 
>>> 
>>> Stef
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to