I will probably sound stupid but here I go. I am no fan of Pragmas. I feel that their syntax is weird and unnecessary and what they do can be easily achieved with a secondary class that provides this meta data. In case of examples it would have been possible to have examples in a separate package together with a class that provides the additional info the IDE needs to trigger the right tools. On the other hand I was neither a fan of using example as part of a method name. Saying that instancePrototype sounds a lot more clear than examplar. On Mon, 22 Aug 2016 at 08:39, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:
Hi sean
this is exactly with <sampleInstance> but this is not exactly the solution doru envision.
But I think that sampleInstance is letting people build extra tools and also let people use the sample method
in their test and others.
Stef
Le 21/8/16 à 02:01, Sean P. DeNigris a écrit :
Tudor Girba-2 wrote
In this case, you will not be able to use the resulting object, and the new energy around examples started from the need to utilize that ability The other solution is to delegate the action to another pragma that can complement the example one. Isn't that what we've settled on? That is, <sampleInstance> for when you need the result? It seems that all bases are covered if those methods return an instance and the browser button takes that instance and opens an inspector, no?
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/example-examplar-tp4911728p4912083.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.