+1 for #shouldXxx I recall I use it a lot too, and #isXxx where that reads better but am struggling for examples. Tim Sent from my iPhone
On 13 Sep 2019, at 02:37, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 4:10 AM ducasse <stepharo@netcourrier.com> wrote:
On 11 Sep 2019, at 04:07, James Foster <Smalltalk@JGFoster.net> wrote:
Would use of ? and ! in unary/keyword selectors be convention or somehow required? If simply convention, then we should start with renaming testing methods to be named is* or has*. flag1 := anInteger even. ânot good" flag2 := anInteger isEven. âbetter" flag3 := anInteger even?. âhow much better?â flag4 := #(1 2 3) includes?: 2. âhow much better?â
I think that I would use ? mainly for unary message
Now Iâm sure that if you look carefully some people use
include for the action includes for the tests
I took include as an example and this is super not intention revealing.
lineUpBlockBrackets
lineUpBlockBrackets? Now I will rewrite them all as shouldLineUpBlockBrackets or isLineUpBlockBrackets and to me for unary message ? makes it a lot better.
Hi Stef,
I have been facing this ambiguity a lot too. And my workaround, most of the times, was also to prefer the "question" method with #should. #is just doesn't sound right in my cases, but #should does sound good in most of them. I would still like to find a better one, but for the moment, in my recent years, I am stuck with #should.
-- Mariano Martinez Peck Email: marianopeck@gmail.com Twitter: @MartinezPeck LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-martinez-peck Blog: https://marianopeck.wordpress.com/