Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol? For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Consistency ensureActionObject ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding 2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense. Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment. Stef On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
What are real problems exactly? If you are going to open each and every method to read the comment or the code instead of trusting the name, IMHO that is going to be a real problem. If the focus shall be on real problems, then why change APIs which are not a real problem? 2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com <http://nabble.com/>.
We already discussed this API it is in the bug tracker: ensureDelete, ensureDeletedâ¦. So do what you want I personally want to focus on more important issues. Once the full world will agree then do not forget to update the FileSystem Chapter that I wrote BTW (this is for the people complaining about the lack of documentation). Stef PERFECT is the ennemy of DONE is my motto too. On Oct 25, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
What are real problems exactly? If you are going to open each and every method to read the comment or the code instead of trusting the name, IMHO that is going to be a real problem. If the focus shall be on real problems, then why change APIs which are not a real problem?
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Yes, I can understand the boring part of it - this is a detail - it's tiring to discuss small details to death - some people speak more than act (me for example :) But can we agree that - details count - critics count (convince yourself that they are not intended for bashing people) - and last one, a good comment does not redeem a bad selector (kudos to one writing the lint rule for this one) 2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
We already discussed this API it is in the bug tracker: ensureDelete, ensureDeletedâ¦.
So do what you want I personally want to focus on more important issues. Once the full world will agree then do not forget to update the FileSystem Chapter that I wrote BTW (this is for the people complaining about the lack of documentation).
Stef
PERFECT is the ennemy of DONE is my motto too.
On Oct 25, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
What are real problems exactly? If you are going to open each and every method to read the comment or the code instead of trusting the name, IMHO that is going to be a real problem. If the focus shall be on real problems, then why change APIs which are not a real problem?
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com <http://nabble.com/>.
On Oct 25, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
What are real problems exactly?
Here is a list - better API for Compiler - better functionality for OPAL - Cleaning Morph (architecture, package structure) - using Slot for real - Removing CodeHolder hierarchy - Improving the tools (usability) - Making sure that in the future we can remove streams and use another Stream library - Removing leadingCharacter and other mess - Running SmallLint on all the packages - Building Pharo from a set of project using metacello - Removing pseudoclass and other shit - Rewriting morphTreeMorph - Enhancing the widgtes set: table for example is missing - Building a UI builder - Cleaning Text - Cleaning morph event model - Supporting GIT for real - improving Log - automatic recategorization of all the methods. - Automatic validation of packages - NativeBoost for ARM - Smoothly supporting remote browsing if you want more I'm quite confident that I can find more problems that I would love to see fixed in Pharo. Stef
If you are going to open each and every method to read the comment or the code instead of trusting the name, IMHO that is going to be a real problem. If the focus shall be on real problems, then why change APIs which are not a real problem?
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Stef, I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that. Norbert Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important. Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus. On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Stef,
I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that.
Norbert
Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Am 25.10.2013 um 15:52 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu>:
The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important.
Maybe. I didnât participate in this discussion. And I donât know about this obscure consistency rules that this particular selector follows. Languages and consistency rules are probably troublesome most of the time. In this particular case I would it have called just like others,too. That would be ensureDirectoryExists. You can indeed âmake sureâ that a âparticular objectâ has a âcertain stateâ after the method is done. But in a single case it is always easy to argue. I would need to see the full list to get in trouble .
Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus.
Oh, hell, no. Iâm stupid but not completely insane :) Norbert
On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Stef,
I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that.
Norbert
Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
+1
The problem with #ensure style selectors is that they are confusing because they both test something and maybe do something to create a certain condition. The only way to take away the confusion is to make a very long selector. That is why comments are also important.
Like Stef said, this was already debated for quite some time. The current choice is maybe not perfect, there is nothing stopping anyone from suggesting a better alternative. Good luck with getting a consensus.
On 25 Oct 2013, at 15:28, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Stef,
I really donât want to stretch this into an argue â¦. but I have problems understanding that. There are refactorings of method selectors because it is said it is important that includesSubString: is written as includesSubstring: and there are other examples. Now we have a selector that people find confusing and that is not important? I donât understand it and the only difference I can see by now is the way you or your team is involved in the action. So the only thing I would understand is sensitivities meaning you are sick of complaints regarding your work. Otherwise I donât understand that.
Norbert
Am 25.10.2013 um 15:04 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
can we focus on real problems? The method has a comment.
Stef
On Oct 25, 2013, at 10:39 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 25.10.2013 um 10:11 schrieb Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com>:
So action=create object=directory you want to be sure that you create a directory? What if it already exists? Since you want to be sure to create, will you erase and re-create? You see the kind of misunderstanding this could create... IOW, self ensureCreateMisunderstanding
+1 I didnât like it in the first place. It is just confusing. And probably an example how hard it can be if two or more non-native speaker try to find something that makes sense.
Norbert
2013/10/25 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> Consistency ensureActionObject
ensureCreateDirectory ensureCreateFile
We discuss a lot with camillo when we did it and I think that this is good right now.
Out of curiosity, what was the motivation behind Issue 10924: Simplifying ensure* and create protocol?
For me #ensureCreateDirectory is less intention revealing than #ensureDirectory because the "ensure" means "create only if necessary", not "definitely create" a directory. What am I missing? Thanks.
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ensureCreateDirectory-tp4716925.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
participants (5)
-
Nicolas Cellier -
Norbert Hartl -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Sven Van Caekenberghe