---- On Tue, 07 Dec 2010 03:51:00 -0800 Stéphane Ducasse wrote ----
>did you create an issue?
>and where did you publish the code?
I uploaded them to the PharoInbox, but as I said, only one minor change in
SmallDictionary>>remove: (adding a carrot "^" at the beginning) will fix the
discrepancy between the two. But if the consensus is that Dictionary>>remove:
and Dictionary>>remove:ifAbsent: should not be implemented, maybe the same
should be true of SmallDictionary as well.
>>>> Is anyone else bother[ed] by this inconsistency?
>>>
>>> Apparently not. Well, I uploaded two packages to the PharoInbox. One adds
>>> #remove: and #remove:ifAbsent: to Dictionary
>>> and updates SmallDictionary's implementations of those messages to return
>>> the same value
>>
>> Regardless of what comes of those packages I uploaded,
>> SmallDictionary>>remove: and SmallDictionary>>remove:ifAbsent: returning two
>> different values is clearly a bug. Looking at it again, I was wrong about
>> SmallDictionary>>remove:ifAbsent: returning the key; it does return the
>> removed association. Which means at a minimum, SmallDictionary>>remove: only
>> needs to have a ^ inserted at its beginning to fix the discrepancy.
>>
>>> - the association removed - rather than their current behavior of #remove:
>>> returning self (no explicit return value) and
>>> #remove:ifAbsent: returning the key of the removed association.
>>> The second package adds #testRemove and
>>> #testRemoveIfAbsent to DictionaryTest (through a trait).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
