On 29 November 2013 23:50, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>
> On 29-11-2013, at 3:38 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 29 November 2013 21:51, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 29-11-2013, at 12:43 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> inherentSelectorForGetter
>>> That’s absolutely a Symbol method and really ought always have been there.
>>
>> It wasn't clear to me either from the senders-of or the implementation
>> whether it should go on Symbol or String, so I went with the
>> broader/safer option, and put it on String.
>>
>> But I take it you're voting for "put it on the dang object" option
>> rather than "monkey patching is evil”?
>
> Guess so; methods ought to go in The Right Place. Now *defining* that place… that’s where the art is.

And so a method that takes a string/symbol and turns it into some
slightly different symbol pretty much ought to go on String/Symbol.

I'm leaning heavily towards the monkey patch option, and not just
because I have the work done waiting for committing. I'll hold off on
anything for the moment though, both because it has a rather large
number of changes to Etoys and to give others a chance to chime in.
That it's midnight here, and I'm tired and hence not in the best shape
to do dangerous things like commit changes has nothing at all to do
with the waiting. Promise.

frank

> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> Strange OpCodes: BIB: Branch If Branch if branch...