Yes, this method name is unfortunate... I think we should just rename the method and tag copyFrom: as deprecated. And some versions later we'll implement copyFrom: as we think is appropriate.
Cheers, Adrian BTW Sebastian, I think your energy would be better invested into producing a changeset and challenging the "invalid"-tag of Henrik in a rational way than to writing a "are you stupid?"-mail. On Jan 1, 2011, at 19:13 , Igor Stasenko wrote: > On 1 January 2011 18:15, Sebastian Sastre <[email protected]> wrote: >> ('if this isn''t broken' copyFrom: 15) ~= 'broken' ifTrue:['this is >> screwed'] ifFalse:['this is intuitive'] > > my first thought about it was that it should answer own copy , > starting from 15th element :) > > >> Evaluate that in any Pharo workspace and it will show you. >> Reported here. >> Status? invalid > > but then i saw its implementation... ouch... > >> Came on guys. Really? >> I ask because, if so, situation goes like this: >> A. we think again and decide to do the right thing or we go with the >> alternative which is >> B. we leave it as invalid, as it is right now, and >> 1. we mislead even to smalltalkers not familiarized to squeak/pharo >> 2. we rationalize some clever way to see it as a feature even if it will >> mislead everybody (even ourselves in a hurry) >> 3. we lay a foundation to lightly use protocol that is typically used in >> collections (to do dangerous things like instVar manipulation) >> 4. we break encapsulation and manipulate extremely primitive things in a >> common sounding selector. >> 5. we work harder on trying to give the impression that we're leaving it >> like that because we're smarter than the confused people that tried to use >> it (proving to them that we're dumb) >> 6. we get involved in an unnecessarily complicated way of thinking that will >> complicate unnecessarily our future (guaranteed) >> 7. we learn how to maintain a screwed attitude in front of people trying to >> use intuition when using pharo >> 8. we stay comfortable (on the wrong foundation and for the wrong reasons) >> That would leave us with this question in the table: >> what is compatible with the Pharo's mission? is it A or B? >> > > hey. slow down.. > > 8 arguments is too much for it, but i can understand how deeply such > thing could hurt :) > > This is really screwed primitive. > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >
