<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 5:33 PM, K. K. Subramaniam <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:subbukk@gmail.com">subbukk@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
On Sunday 06 December 2009 03:11:31 am Jerome Peace wrote:<br>
> Why is that so?<br>
Protocol? basic vocabulary? A method name does set an expectation and people<br>
build up a working vocabulary over time. My early frustrations with Squeak<br>
:-( were with statements like:<br>
<br>
Morph new name<br>
SmalltalkImage explain<br>
PolygonMorph new edit<br>
<br>
asBit breaks the protocol of using asInteger to map an object to a number, so<br>
it is not discoverable manually through Message Finder or automatically using<br>
Method Finder.<br>
<div class="im"><br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+1</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">
> Does anything need to be done about it?<br>
> What would help reduce the confusion/ignorance?<br>
</div>Yes. Message name finder could support wildcard searches (e.g. "open", "open*",<br>
"*with*"). It could present results sorted by relevance (say, number of<br>
senders + number of implementors) to encourage vocabulary.<br>
<br>
Subbu<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><br>