June 1, 2019
12:42 p.m.
On Sat, 1 Jun 2019 at 18:01, Tim Mackinnon <tim@testit.works> wrote:
Maybe this is a dumb question - and often Iâm surprised when asking these, but why is there no way to âfind afterâ a string.
I find it rather boring to try and parse a string, after a known marker - thus: (loc := aString findString: âmarkerâ) > 0 ifTrue: [ loc := loc + âmarkerâ size ].
Is there a better way? This whole pattern seems very old and clunky and not smalltalk like?
Couldnât we have: findAfter: aString ifAbsent: aBlock ?
Or is there a whole better pattern for string searching that Iâm missing ?
Can your input be split into tokens using Stirng>>findTokens: and `ReadStream on: that`. Then you marker will be consumed by a single #next. cheers -ben