> On 03 Mar 2015, at 14:37, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote
>> Yes, maybe this could be made more consistent in Pharo 5, but it is of
>> course again a case of lots of pain for little gain ;-)
> 
> I definitely recall feeling "lots of pain" with the subStringXyz ->
> substringXyz that we're still dealing with in recent updates (I think I
> started that push as a naive newbie), but I'm not sure about the "little
> gain" part. It's hard to quantify the negative effect of inconsistency in
> the system, or the empowering effect of uniformity. There's the practical
> "was /this/ case the milliS or the millis??", as well as the more subtle
> effect of a calm, happy feeling users may get from a system in which the
> little details have been cared for.
> 
> IMNSHO: Fix all these little things now while so many changes are swirling
> around the system. The longer we wait, the more mature/widely-used Pharo
> gets, the less practical these changes will become

I agree, but the recent #subStrings: to #substrings: forced me to add another 
package with one method to make Zinc work in Pharo 2, 3 and 4 (after I managed 
to convince others to make a change to pharo 3 too). 

There *is* pain in those external codebases trying to target multiple versions.
 


Reply via email to