I know, but our students don't :) So they ran into problems because the
message send didn't answer what they were specting....  because it makes
sense that if I want to transform the objects in my collection, I might get
repeated objects... Maybe I'm not thinking in terms of consistency, I'm just
putting myself on student's shoes :P

On 27 October 2011 10:26, Diaz Trepat, Ramiro <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Collections always return results on an new instance of its own #species.
> ****
>
> That is fabulous to me.  It is what's desired most times.****
>
> With that in mind, if you expected a bag or something else, you should
> convert (asXXX) before the collect.****
>
> Cheers****
>
> ** **
>
> r.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Clara Allende
> *Sent:* 27 October 2011 14:15
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* [Pharo-project] aSet collect: answers aSet??****
>
> ** **
>
>
> Hi guys..
> This morning some students came with an exercise like this:
> (Set with: 1 with: 2 with:3 with:4 with:5) collect:[:e | e even]. a
> Set(false true)
>
> But they don't want to get aSet, (regardless this particular example
> doesn't make sense)... the question is, why if I send collect: to aSet I get
> aSet and not aBag? What happens if I *want* repeated elements after the
> transformation? :( And when did this behavior change?
> -- ****
>
> "*Most good programmers do programming not because they expect to get paid
> or get adulation by the public, but because it is fun to program.*" ****
>
> Linus Torvalds****
>
> ** **
>
> This email is confidential and subject to important disclaimers and
> conditions including on offers for the purchase or sale of securities,
> accuracy and completeness of information, viruses, confidentiality, legal
> privilege, and legal entity disclaimers, available at
> http://www.jpmorgan.com/pages/disclosures/email.
>



-- 

"*Most good programmers do programming not because they expect to get paid
or get adulation by the public, but because it is fun to program.*"

Linus Torvalds

Reply via email to