Hi Chris. :-)

> "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.  

Hmm... disagree. Slightly. I like that #new calls #initialize. Yet, it can always be a smell that can be corrected via "super new" or "self basicNew myCustomInitialize". There are several examples in the image of custom initializers that get called explicitely after #basicNew. Though, I prefer the #basicNew+#myCustomInitialize over "super new".

Best,
Marcel
Am 05.09.2019 23:52:39 schrieb Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>:
On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 3:43 PM Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com [mailto: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?
 
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.  

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 [mailto: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 [mailto:tim at rowledge.org]> wrote:



> On 2019-09-04, at 12:58 PM, Thiede, Christoph <Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de [mailto: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 [mailto:tim at rowledge.org]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim [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/20190906/0089c15e/attachment-0001.html>