It would be an overkill to do it for this particular case, but Smalltalk
makes it possible to implement a case-like construction:
[ expression ]
when: [ :value | condition1 ] do: [-0do :value | ... ];
when: [ :value | condition2 ] do: [ :value | ... ];
otherwiseDo: [ :value | ... ];
evaluate
I am sure, something like this has been implemented already somewhere
(maybe in Squeak?). Still not sure it is practical as compared to simple
if-s, and for sure not widely used :)
...On the other hand, sometimes the case-like construction can be
considered a more intension-revealing style.
пт, 27 дек. 2019 г., 22:18 Roelof Wobben via Pharo-users <
pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>:
> Hello,
>
> Im trying to solve a challenge from exercism where I have to calculate
> the points somehow gets on a very simple darts board.
>
> I solved it like this :
>
>
> scoreX: anInteger y: anInteger2
> | distance |
> distance := (anInteger squared + anInteger2 squared) sqrt.
> distance > 10
> ifTrue: [ ^ 0 ].
> distance > 5
> ifTrue: [ ^ 1 ].
> distance > 1
> ifTrue: [ ^ 5 ].
> ^ 10
>
>
> but now I use three if then and I think it's ugly code.
>
> Is there a way I can make it more the smalltalk way ?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Roelof
>
>
