Look like #ifNotEmpty: is the correct choice.

Collection methods select: [ :m |

               (m selector          includesSubstring: 'if' caseSensitive: false) and: [

                              m selector includesSubstring: 'empty' caseSensitive: false

               ]

]

thenCollect: [ :m | m -> m senders size ]

"{

               Collection>>#ifEmpty:->188.

               Collection>>#ifNotEmpty:->113.

               Collection>>#ifNotEmptyDo:ifEmpty:->0.

               Collection>>#ifEmpty:ifNotEmpty:->80.

               Collection>>#ifEmpty:ifNotEmptyDo:->0.

               Collection>>#ifNotEmptyDo:->0.

               Collection>>#ifNotEmpty:ifEmpty:->14

}"

Best regards,

Henrik

From: Pharo-users [mailto:pharo-users-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Peter Uhn��k
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 6:55 PM
To: Pharo Users List <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>
Subject: [Pharo-users] ifNotEmpty(Do):

Collection>>ifNotEmpty: comment says

"If the block has an argument, eval with the receiver as its argument,

but it might be better to use ifNotEmptyDo: to make the code easier to

understand"

yet when I do that, Code Critic complains:

ifNotEmptyDo: should not be used as ifNotEmpty: works for blocks with arguments, too.

1) who is right? what should I use?

2) shouldn't one be deprecated then? (or maybe one of them is to be compatible with other smalltalks?)

Thanks,

Peter