> :funnily enough for me coalesce is far more obscure than preserve.
>>
> Might be the french in you :)
Probably :)
We can't mess up with our roots :)
>
>> Now my point was not for this specific message but I would like to get some
>> guidelines to specify consistent API.
>> And I'm always tho
On 11.08.2010, at 10:31, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> :funnily enough for me coalesce is far more obscure than preserve.
>
Might be the french in you :)
> Now my point was not for this specific message but I would like to get some
> guidelines to specify consistent API.
> And I'm always thorn apa
:funnily enough for me coalesce is far more obscure than preserve.
Now my point was not for this specific message but I would like to get some
guidelines to specify consistent API.
And I'm always thorn apart when writing code if I should use s or not.
Stef
On Aug 11, 2010, at 10:07 AM, Norbert
On 11.08.2010, at 00:56, jaayer wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:18:19 -0700 Norbert Hartl wrote
>
>>
>> But as I wrote in my description of the problem I would call it
>>
>> coalesceCDATASections: aBoolean
>>
>> or
>>
>> enableCoalescing
>> disableCoalescing
>
> The d
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 13:41:09 -0700 jaayer wrote
>The first form is already in use elsewhere in the API and has some advantages
>over the third person singular form (the "is" prefix).
I meant to say here that the "is" prefix is an advantage over the third person
singular form (beca
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 02:18:19 -0700 Norbert Hartl wrote
>
>But as I wrote in my description of the problem I would call it
>
>coalesceCDATASections: aBoolean
>
>or
>
>enableCoalescing
>disableCoalescing
The downside of enable/disable pairs is the need for three message (two
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 12:17:36 -0700 Stéphane Ducasse wrote
>>>
>>
>> The infinitive in English is two words with possibly other words separating
>> them, the word "to" and then the verb lacking any "s" or "es" or other
>> tense, number or person modifiers: "to program" or "to code
>>
>
> The infinitive in English is two words with possibly other words separating
> them, the word "to" and then the verb lacking any "s" or "es" or other tense,
> number or person modifiers: "to program" or "to code."
Thanks. I know the difference :) I meant in method selectors include: vs
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 01:45:42 -0700 Stéphane Ducasse wrote
>Just an api point
>
>why preservesC...
>and not
>preserverC
>
>I'm always confuse with the infinitive and third person singular situation.
>
>Stef
The infinitive in English is two words with possibly other words
>
> coalesceCDATASections: aBoolean
>
> or
>
> enableCoalescing
> disableCoalescing
most of the time you need the 3 because the first one let you easily build
scripts
for me
> coalesceCDATASections: aBoolean
is a setter not a testing selector
___
On 10.08.2010, at 10:45, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> Just an api point
>
> why preservesC...
> and not
> preserverC
>
> I'm always confuse with the infinitive and third person singular situation.
>
You mean preserveC...? The preserve(r)C.. was a typo, right? I think
preservesC... qualifie
Just an api point
why preservesC...
and not
preserverC
I'm always confuse with the infinitive and third person singular situation.
Stef
> Here is an example that demonstrates parsing with CDATA section preservation:
> doc := (XMLDOMParser on: '')
> preservesCDataSections: true;
> parseD
Forwarded message
>From : jaayer
To : "Jan van de Sandt"
Date : Mon, 09 Aug 2010 14:55:29 -0700
Subject : Re: Squeaksource XML Parser - Enhanced support for CDATA Sections
Forwarded message
On Mon, 09 Aug 2010 04:44:07 -0700 Jan van de
13 matches
Mail list logo
