> mm.. well, i prefer that fairly common would be to pass meaningful data back and forth rather than
<br/>&gt; dummy values.
<br/>I don't understand... when I say &quot;fairly common&quot;, I mean that in the C world, it seems common to use null-passing for optional arguments. I'm not saying that it's a good idea, but we don't have control over that, so...
<br/><br/>&gt; For that best solution, IMO, would be to use 2 methods which call same function,
<br/>&gt; but one uses 'nil' in function signature (and therefore method doesn't takes extra argument),
<br/>&gt; while other takes extra argument but doesn't accepts nils, for sure.
<br/>Yuck ;)

	
	
	<div class="signature" style="margin-top:1em;color:#666666;font-size:11px;">
				Cheers,
<br/>Sean
			</div>
<br/><hr align="left" width="300" />
View this message in context: <a href="http://forum.world.st/NativeBoost-Documentation-Suggestion-and-Question-tp4720805p4724069.html">Re: NativeBoost: Documentation Suggestion and Question</a><br/>
Sent from the <a href="http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html">Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive</a> at Nabble.com.<br/>