On 03 Mar 2015, at 14:37, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
Yes, maybe this could be made more consistent in Pharo 5, but it is of course again a case of lots of pain for little gain ;-)
I definitely recall feeling "lots of pain" with the subStringXyz -> substringXyz that we're still dealing with in recent updates (I think I started that push as a naive newbie), but I'm not sure about the "little gain" part. It's hard to quantify the negative effect of inconsistency in the system, or the empowering effect of uniformity. There's the practical "was /this/ case the milliS or the millis??", as well as the more subtle effect of a calm, happy feeling users may get from a system in which the little details have been cared for.
IMNSHO: Fix all these little things now while so many changes are swirling around the system. The longer we wait, the more mature/widely-used Pharo gets, the less practical these changes will become
I agree, but the recent #subStrings: to #substrings: forced me to add another package with one method to make Zinc work in Pharo 2, 3 and 4 (after I managed to convince others to make a change to pharo 3 too). There *is* pain in those external codebases trying to target multiple versions.