On 8/24/2010 2:50 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Andreas Raab wrote:
>
>> Hm ... tell me what you *think* this code would do:
>>
>> dict := Dictionary withAll: {'foo' -> 'bar'. 'hello' -> 'world'}.
>>
>> then run it. Does that seem right to you?
>
> Yes and no. :) Dictionary >> #addAll: expects a "KeyedCollection" as
> argument. Array is a "KeyedCollection" with integer keys.
> But one could expect that #addAll: works like #add: which is not the case.
> We could change #addAll: to use #associationsDo: instead of
> #keysAndValueesDo: as Nicolas said, but it might break some code.

I cannot really imagine which code that would break. Assuming that 
you've got a dictionary would you really use, i.e., aDictionary addAll: 
#('hello' 'world') and expect the result to be 1 -> 'hello' and 2 -> 
'world'? This was *totally* unexpected for me and at first I couldn't 
even understand what was going wrong until I realized that the usage of 
#withAll: caused it.

So yes, I think we should fix that to ensure that #addAll: is consistent 
with #add: as it is in all other collection types.

> If you just want to build a Dictionary from an Array of Associations,
> then #newFrom: does what you need (it uses the #associationsDo: trick).

Yes, both #newFrom: and #as: appear to do the trick - the above is more 
about consistency and least surprises.

Cheers,
   - Andreas