> Am 07.06.2018 um 21:18 schrieb Esteban A. Maringolo <[email protected]>: > > On 07/06/2018 13:59, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: >>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 14:42, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: >>> And safer. The current implementation of NeoJSONObject is not ver good. It >>> returns nil on any missing key so you mask a lot of errors in your code >>> which I find dangerous. >> >> Haha, it was modelled after a JavaScript object, of course it is worse, but >> more convenient in scripting code. >> Sure, a plain Dictionary is better. > > Nothing that syntax sugar mapping some convenient property accessor to > #at: couldn't fix. :) > > If you come this point you should realize that you need to have a domain object instead
- [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have an order NeoJsonObje... Tim Mackinnon
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have an order Ne... Paul DeBruicker
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have an order Ne... Sven Van Caekenberghe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have an orde... Norbert Hartl
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have an ... Sven Van Caekenberghe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to have... Tim Mackinnon
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to... Norbert Hartl
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it ba... Sven Van Caekenberghe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Esteban A. Maringolo
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Norbert Hartl
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it bad to... Richard O'Keefe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is it ba... Norbert Hartl
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Tim Mackinnon
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Tim Mackinnon
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Tim Mackinnon
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Richard O'Keefe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Norbert Hartl
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Herbert Vojčík
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Richard O'Keefe
- Re: [Pharo-users] Is i... Herbert Vojčík
