I do not understand why it is not called #allSubclasses
Returning a group of famixclass seems to be what one would expect no?

Alexandre

Le 07-12-2013 à 17:26, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> a écrit :

This API is there since about a decade. In Smalltalk the selector would have been allSubclasses. However, in Moose, we typically use all for contained elements. This is why it's not called allSubclasses. Another possibility would be to call it deepSubclasses. But, of course, everything is subject to change.

Cheers,
Doru


On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
subclassHierarchy
        | subclasses |
        subclasses := OrderedCollection new.
        self allSubclassesDo: [:each | subclasses add: each].
        ^ subclasses


to me it looks like too much thinking and this kind of API sucks.

I can understand

subclassHierarchyDepth
because it is about hierarchy but no subclasses.

Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev



--
www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow"
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev