[squeak-dev] The Trunk: Graphics-mt.404.mcz
Marcel.Taeumel at hpi.de
Fri Dec 7 10:17:49 UTC 2018
We could tread the receiver as extent in this case and see how it works out?
(50 at 50 center: 5 at 5) = (Rectangle center: 5 at 5 extent: 50 at 50).
David T. Lewis wrote
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2018 at 01:33:57PM -0800, Chris Cunningham wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 6, 2018 at 9:46 AM Bert Freudenberg <
>> > On Wed 5. Dec 2018 at 23:35, marcel.taeumel <
> > 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
>> receiver. As long as the callers name the variables well that might not
>> 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
> 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.
Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Squeak-Dev-f45488.html
More information about the Squeak-dev