[Newbies] Re: Method Finder puzzles
peace_the_dreamer at yahoo.com
Tue Dec 23 01:26:53 UTC 2008
[Newbies] Method Finder puzzles
tjohnson at iwu.eduSat Dec 20 03:31:10 UTC 2008
>Could be a pointless question, but maybe an answer would teach me something about
>I found some things that I can type into Method Finder which show up as results, but have no
>senders and no implementors. These things are ~, ^, #, %, (, <>, and ** . I understand why
>the single-character entries could be exceptional, but the <> and ** puzzle me.
>Why is this? I can type in >>>, ***, &%, or ^^ and not get them back as a result.
>) is in a league of its own -- it shows up as a result, and when you click on it, you get a
>subscript out of bounds error.
>Maybe this is all just Method Finder magic and I should slowly step away.
I played with Method Finder very lightly.
Then I found that Message Names Finder was much easier to use.
5 years after that discovery I found the short cut to use it.
Selected a phrase fragment
and type Cmd-Shif-W. The Message Name Finder will appear with all the selectors containing that fragment.
It is not as focused as Method Finder. Still, personally, I would rather make a guess at the name of a selector and take my chances with the list I get.
The Method Finder takes maintenance and updating to work. And there doesn't seem to be anyone who cares to do that.
I think there is a rule that anything with complicated dependencies in squeak (our branch) tends to break.
Consequence of too many cooks who add ingredients w/o understanding the previous makeup of the stew.
Anyway try the Message Name Finder and see if it serves.
Yours in curiosity and service, --Jerome Peace
More information about the Beginners