[Cuis] Dictionary asSet

[Juan Vuletich]

On 3/4/2015 6:45 PM, Dan Norton wrote:
> On 1 Mar 2015 at 16:06, Juan Vuletich wrote:
>
> >
> > In Squeak, 'someDictionary asSet' answers a set with the values. It
> > should do the same in Cuis,
> > (like Dan and Nicolas want). Maybe we'd also adopt the idea of
> > having HashedCollection as a
> > superclass of both Dictionary and Set, just like in Squeak.
> >
> > Any takers?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Juan Vuletich
> >
> > On 3/1/2015 11:06 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
> >
> >
> >     2015-03-01 10:52 GMT+01:00 Casey Ransberger
> > <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com>:
> >     I think it should probably answer a set of associations,
> > specifically, and also have a
> >     gut feeling that doing so should be relatively cheap. But don't
> > worry so much about
> >     what I think. Look at what the other dialects do, consult book
> > blue, etc...
> >
> >
> >     Please, no.
> >     A Dictionary behaves as a Collection of values,  it's just that
> > it has special keys for indexing
> >     its contents.
> >     Why should asSet do something different than asArray for
> > example?
> >     If we want a set of associations, we can just write aDictionary
> > associations asSet.
> >
> >     Nicolas
> >
> >     Annoying Casey behavior: can you think of an SUnit test that
> > confirms the bug? I'm
> >     not just asking you for a test case, not necessarily, but it
> > would be good to define
> >     expected behavior in a way that allows us later to know that it
> > has changed
> >     inadvertently if it does.
> >
> >     The test is more important than the fix, if the code is to be
> > the curriculum.
> >
> >     --C
> >
> >     On Feb 28, 2015, at 6:45 PM, "Dan Norton"
> > <dnorton at mindspring.com> wrote:
> >
> >     aDictionary asSet should answer a set. Instead, it answers
> > itself (a dictionary).
> >
> >     I tried to create a new issue but the "Submit new issue" button
> > was disabled.
> >
>
> An #asSet method for Dictionary could be implemented as:
>            ^ self as: Set
> which brings a question: in the spirit of Cuis, why not eliminate most 
> of the #asXXX convenience methods, replacing them with the as: Class 
> idiom wherever possible?
>

Yes, this is a good idea. I'm not sure if removing them, but at least 
making them call #as: should reduce code quite a bit.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://jvuletich.org/pipermail/cuis_jvuletich.org/attachments/20150306/43b885de/attachment-0004.html>