On 31 March 2017 at 21:34, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
> > On 31 Mar 2017, at 19:38, Dimitris Chloupis
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 at 19:13, Sven Van Caekenberghe
> wrote:
> > if you copy/paste something you should give a
Hehe yeah I love nice formatting :)
You don't need to convince me , I prefer coding dynamically
Ironically enough is the static that is not a real thing anymore. I am
coding C++ and Unreal uses templates for pretty much everything. Templates
the equivalent of dynamic types, kinda.
However when
> On 31 Mar 2017, at 19:38, Dimitris Chloupis wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 at 19:13, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
> if you copy/paste something you should give a reference
>
>
> I did not copy paste anything, 100 % mine. What part you think it's copy
On Fri, 31 Mar 2017 at 19:13, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
> if you copy/paste something you should give a reference
>
I did not copy paste anything, 100 % mine. What part you think it's copy ?
if you copy/paste something you should give a reference
> On 31 Mar 2017, at 16:40, Dimitris Chloupis wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 5:04 PM Marc Hanisch via Pharo-users
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have a question which is more
Marc,
you should definitely go and understand method lookup and handling of
unknown messages. This is the fun part of Smalltalk ;-)
Just don't overuse it, because you can do things that are so cool you
won't be able to understand your own code any more ;-)
Joachim
--
--- Begin Message ---
Thanks for that many responses! :-)
I think I get the picture! In JavaScript I do that type checking because
although I get an error, when requesting a method that is not defined, I do
not get one when requesting or setting a property that does not exists.
Much more worse in
In other words: don't ask - tell.
Instead of writing something like:
object isSomething ifTrue: [ object doSomething ] ifFalse: [ object
doSomethingElse ]
just write it:
object doSomething
that gives you much less code bloat, and much clear view of your intent(s)
and even in case of exception
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 11:06 PM, Stephan Eggermont
wrote:
> On 30/03/17 16:03, Marc Hanisch via Pharo-users wrote:
>>
>> Reading this, I realized, that I never saw such type-checking in
>> Pharo production code. So the question is, what are recommended
>> design principles for
2017-03-30 16:03 GMT+02:00 Marc Hanisch via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>:
> It is advised not to use the message isKindOf: in applications.
>
> I do understand that it is not a good idea to do different operations
> depending on the kind of an object in one method. But in my
Hi Marc,
> Reading this, I realized, that I never saw such type-checking in Pharo
> production code. So the question is, what are recommended design principles
> for that problem in Smalltalk? Do you use what is called duck typing?
I have carefully studied the topic of type checking in the
On 30/03/17 16:03, Marc Hanisch via Pharo-users wrote:
Reading this, I realized, that I never saw such type-checking in
Pharo production code. So the question is, what are recommended
design principles for that problem in Smalltalk? Do you use what is
called duck typing?
Normally I'm not
--- Begin Message ---
Hello,
I have a question which is more related to software engineering than to
Pharo, but I hope that someone can give me an useful hint ;-)
In Pharo By Example 5, Page 308, in the Chapter "Introspection", it is
written:
"Although these features (type inspection) are
13 matches
Mail list logo