This API is there since about a decade.
well. I do not think that this is that long.
In Smalltalk the selector would have been
allSubclasses. However, in Moose, we typically use all for contained elements.
what do you mean?
This is why it's not called allSubclasses. Another
possibility would be to call it deepSubclasses. But, of course, everything is subject to
change.
I do not understand why you choose something that goes against our cultural reference.
to me allSubclasses is simple, intention revealing and it works well.
I started to create my own extensions because I do not have the brain cells to remember
that sublcassHierarhcy which refers to a "bag" returns
the bag elements.
Stef
Cheers,
Doru
On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev