[squeak-dev] Object>>className
Eliot Miranda
eliot.miranda at gmail.com
Thu Mar 23 21:08:16 UTC 2017
Hi All,
I find Object>>#className offensive; is methods are far nicer than this
nonsense. First of all className is implemented in several Monticello
classes to do what you'd expect; answer the name of a class of some
to-be-imported item such as a method or class definition. Second, there
are tests out there that simply don't do what a naive reading might expect:
testClassCommentAnnotation
| annotation |
browser selectSystemCategory: browser class category.
browser selectClass: browser class.
annotation := browser annotationForClassCommentFor: browser class.
self assert: (annotation includesSubstring: browser class organization
commentStamp).
self assert: (annotation includesSubstring: 'class comment for').
self assert: (annotation includesSubstring: browser className).
Is it /really/ that hard to write foo class name instead of foo className
and have subclasses prevented from using it easily e.g. when one tries to
do "create inst var accessors" for a class that one has added a className
inst var? We already have Object>>#name, which is horrible enough. Ca we
think seriously about nuking Object>>#className?
The grouch.
_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20170323/fb7a49de/attachment.html>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|