[Pharo-project] Object>>#name
Hi, Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use name as an instance variable and thus accessor. Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). I just put a halt in it and tried a couple of tools and everything seems to work just fine. The comment talks about Inspector use, but there is #defaultLabelForInspector for that. It is a small thing, but it confuses everybody for no good reason, Any comments ? Sven PS: it was also in the testing procotol ;-) -- Sven Van Caekenberghe http://stfx.eu Smalltalk is the Red Pill
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
Hi Sven. Yes, as far as I remember, Object>>name was safe to remove. Not likewise Class>>name but ok, it is less likely final users will need class side #name. So +1 to removing instance side #name. On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > Hi, > > Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then > seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use > name as an instance variable and thus accessor. > > Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). > > I just put a halt in it and tried a couple of tools and everything seems > to work just fine. > > The comment talks about Inspector use, but there is > #defaultLabelForInspector for that. > > It is a small thing, but it confuses everybody for no good reason, > > Any comments ? > > Sven > > PS: it was also in the testing procotol ;-) > > -- > Sven Van Caekenberghe > http://stfx.eu > Smalltalk is the Red Pill > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote > Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then > seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use > name as an instance variable and thus accessor. Yes, I've been bitten by this a few times. When developing through the debugger, it's confusing when the thing fails silently instead of prompting to create the method. Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote > Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). There are lots of senders... I guess they're sending Class>>#name or another message. I say ditch it, but wait until 3.0... -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Object-name-tp4664573p4664583.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
> Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >> Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then >> seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use >> name as an instance variable and thus accessor. > > Yes, I've been bitten by this a few times. When developing through the > debugger, it's confusing when the thing fails silently instead of prompting > to create the method. > > > Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >> Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). > > There are lots of senders... I guess they're sending Class>>#name or another > message. I say ditch it, but wait until 3.0… + 1 Open a bug entry for 3.0 Stef > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Object-name-tp4664573p4664583.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
+1 to removal... Regards, Gary - Original Message - From: "Sean P. DeNigris" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:02 PM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use name as an instance variable and thus accessor. Yes, I've been bitten by this a few times. When developing through the debugger, it's confusing when the thing fails silently instead of prompting to create the method. Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). There are lots of senders... I guess they're sending Class>>#name or another message. I say ditch it, but wait until 3.0... -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Object-name-tp4664573p4664583.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
+1 On Jan 22, 2013, at 6:45 PM, "Gary Chambers" wrote: > +1 to removal... > > Regards, Gary > > - Original Message - From: "Sean P. DeNigris" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2013 5:02 PM > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name > > >> Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >>> Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then >>> seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use >>> name as an instance variable and thus accessor. >> >> Yes, I've been bitten by this a few times. When developing through the >> debugger, it's confusing when the thing fails silently instead of prompting >> to create the method. >> >> >> Sven Van Caekenberghe-2 wrote >>> Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). >> >> There are lots of senders... I guess they're sending Class>>#name or another >> message. I say ditch it, but wait until 3.0... >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Object-name-tp4664573p4664583.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
Indeed, is a common accessor for domain/business objects. Have got use to having to re-implement each time myself but quicker to not have to. Regards, Gary - Original Message - From: "Sven Van Caekenberghe" To: Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 6:43 PM Subject: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name Hi, Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then seems to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use name as an instance variable and thus accessor. Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). I just put a halt in it and tried a couple of tools and everything seems to work just fine. The comment talks about Inspector use, but there is #defaultLabelForInspector for that. It is a small thing, but it confuses everybody for no good reason, Any comments ? Sven PS: it was also in the testing procotol ;-) -- Sven Van Caekenberghe http://stfx.eu Smalltalk is the Red Pill
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
hi gary we will address it. :) Stef On Jan 22, 2013, at 3:31 PM, Gary Chambers wrote: > Indeed, is a common accessor for domain/business objects. > Have got use to having to re-implement each time myself but quicker to not > have to. > > Regards, Gary > > - Original Message - From: "Sven Van Caekenberghe" > To: > Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 6:43 PM > Subject: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name > > > Hi, > > Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then seems > to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use name as > an instance variable and thus accessor. > > Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). > > I just put a halt in it and tried a couple of tools and everything seems to > work just fine. > > The comment talks about Inspector use, but there is #defaultLabelForInspector > for that. > > It is a small thing, but it confuses everybody for no good reason, > > Any comments ? > > Sven > > PS: it was also in the testing procotol ;-) > > -- > Sven Van Caekenberghe > http://stfx.eu > Smalltalk is the Red Pill > > >
Re: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name
On 22 Jan 2013, at 20:24, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > hi gary > > we will address it. :) > > Stef http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=7304 > On Jan 22, 2013, at 3:31 PM, Gary Chambers wrote: > >> Indeed, is a common accessor for domain/business objects. >> Have got use to having to re-implement each time myself but quicker to not >> have to. >> >> Regards, Gary >> >> - Original Message - From: "Sven Van Caekenberghe" >> To: >> Sent: Monday, January 21, 2013 6:43 PM >> Subject: [Pharo-project] Object>>#name >> >> >> Hi, >> >> Many people have hit the fact that Object implements #name, which then seems >> to conflict with some other class where one would really like to use name as >> an instance variable and thus accessor. >> >> Turns out that it seems that Object>>#name is actually not used (anymore). >> >> I just put a halt in it and tried a couple of tools and everything seems to >> work just fine. >> >> The comment talks about Inspector use, but there is >> #defaultLabelForInspector for that. >> >> It is a small thing, but it confuses everybody for no good reason, >> >> Any comments ? >> >> Sven >> >> PS: it was also in the testing procotol ;-) >> >> -- >> Sven Van Caekenberghe >> http://stfx.eu >> Smalltalk is the Red Pill >> >> >> > >
