I was just found a bug in my code because I had written it assuming that the number 0 (zero) is neither positive nor negative. It failed because:
0 positive "true"
Really?
Ah, okay, there's #strictlyPositive, I'll use that.
But it seems like #nonNegative might be a better name then!
Those methods conform to the ANSI standard. ;)
Levente
On Sat, 30 Jun 2018, Chris Muller wrote:
I was just found a bug in my code because I had written it assuming that the number 0 (zero) is neither positive nor negative. It failed because:
0 positive "true"
Really?
Ah, okay, there's #strictlyPositive, I'll use that.
But it seems like #nonNegative might be a better name then!
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org