no, I vote for #deleteIfAbsent: too On Jun 12, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> Hi Stef. It looks we are minority. So today I will: > - add #testExists (becuase it was broken but no test) > - add #ensureDeleted > - add #testEnsureDeleted > - fix FileSystemHandleTest >> tearDown to #ensureDeleted the reference. > > cheers > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> > wrote: > Yes to me ensureDelete or ensureDeleted is not explicit enough. I prefer > remove/delete[ifAbsent:] > On Jun 12, 2012, at 1:41 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > > > I generally default to saying "of course there should be an error." I much > > prefer to get my bad news early rather than having to fish around or it > > after the fact. Toward that end, I would recommend having #deleteIfAbsent: > > and #delete that provides an error-raising block and forwards to > > #deleteifAbsent:. That is consistent with collections, which are not a bad > > model/source-of-inspiration for managing directory contents. > > > > Having #ensureDeleted in addition to above does no real harm. I would > > prefer that the selector start with "delete" so it appears close to the > > other methods in browsers, even w/o category filtering - makes it more > > discoverable. > > > > Just my 2 asCents. > > > > Bill > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > From: [email protected] > > [[email protected]] on behalf of Chris Cunningham > > [[email protected]] > > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 5:55 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] FileReference should throw error when deleting > > unexisting files? > > > > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 2:32 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Maybe #ensureDeleted would be better? > >> > >> Nico > > I like #ensureDeleted (make sure it doesn't exist) > > > > > > > > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >
