On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 15:39:08 -0800, Dave Carrigan <d...@rudedog.org> said: > >On Dec 20, 2009, at 3:29 PM, Graham Cox wrote: > >> I think what the OP was talking about was making a called method sensitive to its caller, which is a no-no. > > >That's what I thought the OP was saying, and I agree. It would mean that doing a refactor and changing a method's name, or even adding a new parameter to a method, would break the code in some unrelated method. That's a huge maintenance problem.
Well, I took the OP to mean just the opposite. Procedures often have to be broken into two parts, esp. because of sheets; so, you might start out in doMyThing:, but then you show a sheet and after the delegate callback you want to proceed to doMyThingPart2:. Since the latter name is derivable from the former, passing _cmd is a sensible way to generalize this situation, and it's the exact opposite of a huge maintenance problem; provided the naming convention is obeyed (a common enough pattern in Cocoa), pairs of methods can be introduced or removed at will as development proceeds. m. -- matt neuburg, phd = m...@tidbits.com, <http://www.tidbits.com/matt/> A fool + a tool + an autorelease pool = cool! AppleScript: the Definitive Guide - Second Edition! http://www.tidbits.com/matt/default.html#applescriptthings _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
