On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 01:33:57PM -0800, Chris Cunningham wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:46 AM Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed 5. Dec 2018 at 23:35, marcel.taeumel <Marcel.Taeumel at hpi.de> wrote:
> >
> >> I think that we got used to seeing "0 at 0 corner: 10 at 10" as a rectangle.
> >> Like
> >> "0 at 0 to: 10 at 10" might create a line (or an interval over points? The
> >> same?
> >> :-). Yet, "0 at 0 extent: 10 at 10" could also be a line or a vector.
> >>
> >> I like the verb-vs-noun argument. So, following Nicolas', Eliot's, and
> >> David's thoughts, I vote for:
> >>
> >> Point >> #center:
> >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > It's decent, but I would assume that the ARGUMENT is the center, not the
> receiver.  As long as the callers name the variables well that might not be
> a problem, but
> 
> 10 at 10 center: 5 at 5
> 
> reading it without the discussion here, which would you assume the center
> to be? 10 at 10 or 5 at 5?
> 
> Maybe #centerWithExtent:?
>    10 at 10 centerWithExtent: 5 at 5
> 

+1

I think it may have been me who suggested #center: so I will say that
I think #centerWithExtent: is more readable, and remains consistent
with the existing #corner: and #extent: methods.

Dave