I using the #valueWithEnoughArguments: in my project but i found that BlockClosure doesn't implements that in 3.10 image i updated from trunk.
There is, however #valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray
But its a bit different , because it ensuring that block will be evaluated even if you passing not enough arguments to it. Strange design choice, btw:
valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray
^numArgs = 0 ifTrue: [self value] ifFalse: [self valueWithArguments: (numArgs = anArray size ifTrue: [anArray] ifFalse: [numArgs > anArray size ifTrue: [anArray, (Array new: numArgs - anArray size)] ifFalse: [anArray copyFrom: 1 to: numArgs]])]
Does it makes sense to pass 'anArray, (Array new: numArgs - anArray size)' at all, because blocks usually using all arguments they expecting, and there is 99.9% probability that passing nils to it will lead to errors. But passing them in such style will make people wonder, where these nils came from.
Oh, sorry, i just found that #valueWithPossibleArgs: resembles the same behavior, i.e. fills rest of arguments array with nils if there is not enough.
So, the question mainly is that these two methods make each other redundant, and one of them should be removed.
2009/7/25 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
I using the #valueWithEnoughArguments: in my project but i found that BlockClosure doesn't implements that in 3.10 image i updated from trunk.
There is, however #valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray
But its a bit different , because it ensuring that block will be evaluated even if you passing not enough arguments to it. Strange design choice, btw:
valueWithPossibleArgs: anArray
^numArgs = 0 ifTrue: [self value] ifFalse: [self valueWithArguments: (numArgs = anArray size ifTrue: [anArray] ifFalse: [numArgs > anArray size ifTrue: [anArray, (Array new: numArgs - anArray size)] ifFalse: [anArray copyFrom: 1 to: numArgs]])]
Does it makes sense to pass 'anArray, (Array new: numArgs - anArray size)' at all, because blocks usually using all arguments they expecting, and there is 99.9% probability that passing nils to it will lead to errors. But passing them in such style will make people wonder, where these nils came from.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
2009/7/25 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
Oh, sorry, i just found that #valueWithPossibleArgs: resembles the same behavior, i.e. fills rest of arguments array with nils if there is not enough.
oops. i meant #valueWithEnoughArguments: in above. Sorry for flooding :)
So, the question mainly is that these two methods make each other redundant, and one of them should be removed.
Yeah, I discovered these strange customs with http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7352 To me, the whole API looks hackish and messy, but it seems to be used, so will be hard to remove...
2009/7/25 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
2009/7/25 Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:
Oh, sorry, i just found that #valueWithPossibleArgs: resembles the same behavior, i.e. fills rest of arguments array with nils if there is not enough.
oops. i meant #valueWithEnoughArguments: in above. Sorry for flooding :)
So, the question mainly is that these two methods make each other redundant, and one of them should be removed.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 7:37 AM, Nicolas Cellier < nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, I discovered these strange customs with http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7352 To me, the whole API looks hackish and messy, but it seems to be used, so will be hard to remove...
The reason they're used is that they are the easiest way to create methods which do the right thing with optional parameters. Now perhaps the "right thing" to do would be add a feature to the parser that allowed methods to "degrade" such that:
foo:withBar:andNarf:
can be
foo:withBar:
and
foo:
or event possibly
foo
rather than having to write 4 separate methods. It is incredibly useful when you have say block closures stuck in a dictionary that has the block closures swapped out based on the behavior of those blocks. Where would you ever use such at thing? Poker playing AI! Seriously, if you're implementing a system that can play a game like "Follow the Queen" , the rules of the game change based on what cards are showing. The easiest way to implement this is to swap out individual rules when some events happen.
But discussions like this go nowhere fast :) For example:
http://www.cincomsmalltalk.com/userblogs/rademers/blogView?showComments=true...
and
http://www.smalltalk.org/articles/article_20050216_a1.html
actually its a shame the discussion hasn't been more vigorous :)
Dave
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- http://blog.dloh.org/
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
David Goehrig -
Igor Stasenko -
Nicolas Cellier