... because using method is old school and pragma's are new school ;) (Java annotations anyone) Arguably using pragma's is cleaner approach to specify orthogonal concerns but without full IDE support (refactorings etc to minimize unmaintained pragma's) I would argue for just using a method and package based on convention. At the end of the day both solutions will work but if we are going to aggregate all the MethodFinder acceptable selectors into a class method then we may as well drop the pragma... On 24 Jun 2011, at 3:41 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: Yes we were wondering with igor why using pragmas and that a simple list would be enough. Stef On Jun 24, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
Why not something like
Magnitude class>>finderApprovedMethods ^ {#max: . #min: . #min:max: . #< . ... }
It is shorter and less magic is involved here. It will also be probably faster to do a query.
Cheers, Alexandre
On 24 Jun 2011, at 05:25, Damien Cassou wrote:
Currently MethodFinder uses a list of acceptable selectors to execute. This list of selectors is not maintained which results in a lot of selectors to exist only in this list as they have been removed in the system. I propose to use pragmas on classes to generate this list automatically.
Here is an example
Magnitude class>>finderApprovedMethods <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #max:> <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #min:> <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #min:max:> <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #< > <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #<= > <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #< > <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #<= > <finderApproveInstanceMethod: #between:and: >
What do you think?
-- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
"Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.