Hello list,

that's just a detail, but I do not much like Character>>unicodeToMacRoman.

Why?
Because a Character does not explicitely carry encoding information.
On the contrary, Character are implicitely considered as unicode
encoded in 99% of code.

So, pretending a Character can change encoding is just a hack for a
small portion of code...
...and IMO a ugly one because a Debugger for example would be fooled
and its user too (ego quoque).
I bet most usages of this message will be (someCharacter
unicodeToMacRoman charCode),
so the pretended MacRoman encoded Character does not really need to exist...
(Shame on me, I have not downloaded a recent image, I'm just picking
changes here and there).

If what I say is true, wouldn't a Character>>macRomanCharCode be more clean?

Nicolas

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to