Le jeu. 5 sept. 2019 à 23:52, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> a écrit :

> On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:43 PM Nicolas Cellier <
> nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> IMO, no.
>> We don't want to have an empty Matrix by default, it's useless 99% of
>> time.
>>
>
> But that's exactly what this commit is about -- having "Matrix new" return
> a well-formed (empty) Matrix.  Isn't it what we're talking about?
>
>
Yes, but the 1% of case when this could be useful should not spoil the 99%.

So it means initializing twice for nothing 99% of time.
>>
>
> "Initializing twice" is something we've accepted as an acceptable
> trade-off for nice code since 2006, when we changed Behavior>>#new to call
> #initialize.
>
> The reason to put initialize in Behavior was to avoid hundreds of
duplications of ^self basicNew initialize
The trade off was to eventually call an empty initialize method for those
not needing one

Most classes take care to not double initialize when using alternate
instance creation method.
That's why they use basicNew/basicNew:.
So we can have our cake and eat it too.

Wasting does not fit the predominant definition of nice nowadays, at least
not mine ;)

Via Array empty, we're talking about three measly variable assignments.
> Maybe it's just me, but that's light enough to prefer the nicer code.
>
>  - Chris
>
>
>
>
>> That's exactly where I would put basicNew...
>>
>
>>
>
>> Le jeu. 5 sept. 2019 à 22:35, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> a
>> écrit :
>>
>>> C'mon guys, it's neither!
>>>
>>> "Different super call" is a classic smell picked up by Lint, and I agree
>>> with Tim about "basicNew" -- is an unnecessary use of a low-level method.
>>>
>>> So why not simply the same conventional Smalltalky way, overriding
>>> #initialize like everywhere else?
>>>
>>>   initialize
>>>        super initialize.
>>>        self rows: 0 columns: 0 contents: Array empty
>>>
>>> And, done..?
>>>
>>>  - Chris
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 3:38 PM tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > On 2019-09-04, at 12:58 PM, Thiede, Christoph <
>>>> Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > Thank you :)
>>>> >
>>>> > A very minor question: Would you favor [self basicNew] over [super
>>>> new]? It will work completely equivalently, but what is the better style?
>>>>
>>>> ^super new
>>>>
>>>> `self basicNew` will not always work equivalently. And I can almost
>>>> guarantee it will always do the wrong thing just when you feel sure it is
>>>> doing the right thing. And you will suffer Debugging Hell.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> tim
>>>> --
>>>> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
>>>> Why use one word when two polysyllabic agglomerates will do?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20190906/b95b3856/attachment.html>