method naming advice

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
6 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

method naming advice

Mark Volkmann
I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.

I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A Java  
class has these methods.

     public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
     public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object  
value) ...

What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
Here's my first guess.

attrName:value:
attrPrefix:name:value:

Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just  
need data describing an attribute so I can output it.

---
Mark Volkmann




_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: method naming advice

Bert Freudenberg
Am 26.09.2008 um 12:24 schrieb Mark Volkmann:

> I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.

Not yet ;)

> I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A Java  
> class has these methods.
>
>    public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
>    public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object  
> value) ...
>
> What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
> Here's my first guess.
>
> attrName:value:
> attrPrefix:name:value:


The way to test this is to check how it looks in a method using this.  
Looks okay except that a Smalltalker probably would prefer "attribute"  
to "attr".

> Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just  
> need data describing an attribute so I can output it.

I'm not sure I understand ... do these methods return an new Attribute  
object? Or is the method writing the arguments directly?

- Bert -


_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: method naming advice

John McKeon
In reply to this post by Mark Volkmann
One newbie to another - YES LOL  Just kidding

If it were me.....I would look for something already in Squeak - like
XMLElement  in the XML-Parser category - and either use it straight out
of the box or subclass it. (Notice it already has attributeAt:
attributeName put: attributeValue)

Just my two cents.

Mark Volkmann wrote:

> I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.
>
> I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A Java
> class has these methods.
>
>     public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
>     public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object value) ...
>
> What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
> Here's my first guess.
>
> attrName:value:
> attrPrefix:name:value:
>
> Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just
> need data describing an attribute so I can output it.
>
> ---
> Mark Volkmann
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>

_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: method naming advice

Mark Volkmann
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
On Sep 26, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

> Am 26.09.2008 um 12:24 schrieb Mark Volkmann:
>
>> I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.
>
> Not yet ;)
>
>> I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A Java  
>> class has these methods.
>>
>>   public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
>>   public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object  
>> value) ...
>>
>> What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
>> Here's my first guess.
>>
>> attrName:value:
>> attrPrefix:name:value:
>
> The way to test this is to check how it looks in a method using  
> this. Looks okay except that a Smalltalker probably would prefer  
> "attribute" to "attr".
>
>> Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just  
>> need data describing an attribute so I can output it.
>
> I'm not sure I understand ... do these methods return an new  
> Attribute object? Or is the method writing the arguments directly?


The method writes the part of the XML corresponding to the attribute  
to a stream. For example,

wax attrName: 'foo' value: 'bar'

would write ' foo="bar"' to the stream and

was attrPrefix: 'p' name: 'foo' value: 'bar'

would write ' p:foo="bar"' to the stream.

---
Mark Volkmann




_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: method naming advice

Mark Volkmann
In reply to this post by John McKeon
On Sep 26, 2008, at 2:42 PM, John McKeon wrote:

> One newbie to another - YES LOL  Just kidding
>
> If it were me.....I would look for something already in Squeak -  
> like XMLElement  in the XML-Parser category - and either use it  
> straight out of the box or subclass it. (Notice it already has  
> attributeAt: attributeName put: attributeValue)

The reason I don't want to do that is that I'm porting a library I  
wrote to Smalltalk. I've already implemented it in Java and Ruby.  
Other people are working on Perl, C# and JavaScript implementations.  
If you're interested, you can read about it at http://www.ociweb.com/ 
wax.

I'm not necessarily expecting that the Smalltalk world will gravitate  
toward using my library. For now I'm doing it mainly for the learning  
experience.

> Just my two cents.
>
> Mark Volkmann wrote:
>> I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.
>>
>> I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A Java  
>> class has these methods.
>>
>>    public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
>>    public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object  
>> value) ...
>>
>> What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
>> Here's my first guess.
>>
>> attrName:value:
>> attrPrefix:name:value:
>>
>> Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just  
>> need data describing an attribute so I can output it.
>>
>> ---
>> Mark Volkmann
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Beginners mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beginners mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners


---
Mark Volkmann




_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: method naming advice

Bert Freudenberg
In reply to this post by Mark Volkmann

Am 26.09.2008 um 12:46 schrieb Mark Volkmann:

> On Sep 26, 2008, at 2:36 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
>> Am 26.09.2008 um 12:24 schrieb Mark Volkmann:
>>
>>> I hope I'm not exceeding the limit for questions in one day.
>>
>> Not yet ;)
>>
>>> I'm porting some Java code that deals with XML to Smalltalk. A  
>>> Java class has these methods.
>>>
>>>  public StartTagWAX attr(String name, Object value) ...
>>>  public StartTagWAX attr(String prefix, String name, Object  
>>> value) ...
>>>
>>> What would be good Smalltalk names for these methods?
>>> Here's my first guess.
>>>
>>> attrName:value:
>>> attrPrefix:name:value:
>>
>> The way to test this is to check how it looks in a method using  
>> this. Looks okay except that a Smalltalker probably would prefer  
>> "attribute" to "attr".
>>
>>> Note that I don't really have a new to create Attr objects. I just  
>>> need data describing an attribute so I can output it.
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand ... do these methods return an new  
>> Attribute object? Or is the method writing the arguments directly?
>
>
> The method writes the part of the XML corresponding to the attribute  
> to a stream. For example,
>
> wax attrName: 'foo' value: 'bar'
>
> would write ' foo="bar"' to the stream and
>
> was attrPrefix: 'p' name: 'foo' value: 'bar'
>
> would write ' p:foo="bar"' to the stream.


I see. In that case I'd just name the methods

        attribute:value:
and
        prefix:attribute:value:

The first one actually exists in Squeak's XMLWriter ;)

In general we prefer single words over interCaps - makes code more  
readable.

- Bert -


_______________________________________________
Beginners mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/beginners