[squeak-dev] ifTrue: vs. ifFalse:

Chris Muller asqueaker at gmail.com
Wed Oct 19 00:57:38 UTC 2011

> For those of us who read those sentences in two parts: "x ~= y" and
> "ifTrue:...", the "not" being included in the comparison is preferred as it
> tells us up front what the comparison is about.  Then the second part tells
> us what is being done about it.  I hope helps and makes some sense.

That's a great thought, thanks.  It made me remember, a couple of
times (cough), I have focused too quickly on the first-part (the
condition) and then the second part (the what-to-do) so quickly that
missed the middle part (the "ifFalse:") and made me mis-interpret the
code momentarily because I assumed it was the true case..

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list