Le dim. 28 avr. 2019 à 04:57, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 27, 2019, 14:27 ducasse <stepharo@netcourrier.com> wrote:
Hi
I was looking at the API of Color and it is really confusing to me and
wrong
For example beOpaque
beOpaque "Set the transparency of the receiver to opaque, i.e. alpha to 1.0."
^ self alpha: 1.0
But
alpha: aFloat "Answer a new Color with the given amount of opacity ('alpha')."
^ self class r: self red g: self green b: self blue alpha: aFloat
Or
adjustBrightness: brightness "Adjust the relative brightness of this color. (lowest value is 0.005 so that hue information is not lost)â
but this creates a new color.
I would really like to see how we can improve the fact that reading the method selector should let us understand whether a message is modifying or not the receiver.
Since many methods such as darker, duller,â¦. do not show that they return a new instance but actually do it. May be we can make sure that modifying receiver methods are much better identified as doing so.
beOpaque -> asOpaque adjustBrightness: -> colorWithBrigthness:
Do you have any better ideas?
Stef
On Sun, 28 Apr 2019 at 07:06, Gabriel Cotelli <g.cotelli@gmail.com> wrote:
I tend to use the following idioms: - 'beSomething' idiom for cases modifying the receiver. - 'asSomething' can or cannot return a new object
This indicates some type of conversion which naturally must be a different object, so for consistency it would be nice to be able to consider this always returns a new object, except that... s := 'abcd'. s == s asString. ==> true Maybe it *should* return a copy, but thats fairly pervasive in the system and maybe subtly relied on.
cheers -ben
Hi Ben, Why this expectation? If i'm already a String, I rather have the right to be lazy. The selector is not asNewString.