Hi!

Lex Spoon <lex at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> goran at krampe.se writes:
> > And since you are then rumming about in Collection and friends - add
> > #removeAll while you are at it with efficient implementations in
> > suitable subclasses. I tried a few years back but got my head bitten off
> > and retreated. ;)
> 
> Curiously, there is no removeAll method in Collection, in 3.7, 3.8, or
> 3.9.  There are very few removeAll methods at all, most are not in the
> Collection hierarchy, and one of them is deprecated.  Maybe you are
> thinking of a *proposed* removeAll method or methods?

Yes, I am proposing to add it. I wrote *add* :). I argumented for such a
method a few years back but as I said - I did not have the energy to
argue with other prominent Smalltalkers saying that it was a bad idea. I
still think it is an obviously good idea - especially since it can be
concretely efficiently implemented in selected subclasses.

> Speaking of which, why is SharedQueue2>>removeAll marked
> "Deprecated3.9".  It seems like a useful method, and there is no
> replacement.  Especially odd is that SharedQueue2>>flush is marked as
> "deprecated: 'use removeAll'".
> 
> -Lex

No idea. I also think SharedBufferStreams on SM is better than
SharedQueue. ;)

regards, Göran