Hi Marcel,

> Perhaps I'm getting too old, but I see no reason to use these methods
> when you know the receiver is a stream.
>
> That's right. :-) Both #any: and #take: are generic forms of #anyOne and
> #first: and similar for collections that are not necessarily sequenceable.
> The partial adaptation of the collection protocol for streams is still
> experimental. It is useful in scripting scenarios.
>
> "stream take: 42" does not make any sense.
> "streamOrCollection take: 42" can be quite useful. :-)
>

Hmmm....   There really isn't much other shared API between the two, is
there?  Let's see:

    Collection methodDictionary keys intersection: Stream methodDictionary
keys
             "--->   #(#printOn: #gather: #take: #reject: #contents #write:
#any: #collect: #select:thenCollect: #do: #select:)"

Wow, that's actually more than I thought.  Still, look at the size of the
mismatch!

       (Collection methodDictionary keys difference: Stream
methodDictionary keys ) size        "---> 162"

It kinda makes sense since, semantically, they're two *totally different*
things.  Even the ones that match, the semantics are not always the same.
For example, #do: -- enumerates all elements in Collection, or *only the
remaining* elements in Stream.

So I'm not so sure going further down the path of encouraging client code
to interchange two such disparate objects was a good idea.  Don't they
usually take either/or as input convenience, but then use or convert to
whatever it uses for internal implementation..

Best,
  Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200304/8768acf2/attachment.html>