> testMetaclassSuperclass
> "self run: #testMetaclassSuperclass"
>
> self assert: Dictionary class superclass == Set class.
> self assert: OrderedCollection class superclass ==
> SequenceableCollection class.
What is the important is the metaclass relationship, and not really the fact
that Dictionary is a subclass of Set.
I think this is better:
self assert: Dictionary class superclass == Dictionary superclass class.
self assert: OrderedCollection class superclass == OrderedCollection
superclass class.
>
> testSuperclass
> "self run: #testSuperclass"
>
> | s |
> self assert: Dictionary superclass == Set.
> self assert: OrderedCollection superclass == SequenceableCollection.
>
> s := OrderedCollection new.
> s add: SequenceableCollection.
> s add: Collection.
> s add: Object.
> s add: ProtoObject.
>
> self assert: OrderedCollection allSuperclasses = s.
I would rewrite the test as:
testSuperclass
"self debug: #testSuperclass"
| s b |
s := OrderedCollection new.
b := [:cls | cls ifNotNil: [s add: cls. b value: cls superclass] ].
b value: OrderedCollection.
self assert: OrderedCollection allSuperclasses = s allButFirst.
self assert: OrderedCollection withAllSuperclasses = s.
You even test #withAllSuperclasses in that case.
Cheers,
Alexandre
>
>
> let me know what you think.
>
> Stef
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
