#printStringLimitedTo:

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

#printStringLimitedTo:

KenDickey
I find it kind of odd that #printStringLimitedTo: takes the prefix of a too-long string and adds '...etc...', which itself is 9 characters.

I think a shorter addition would make more sense.  After all, the string is already too long, right?

I like '[..]' , which is only four characters.

Would anyone else like to weigh in on this?  Other options?

-KenD

_______________________________________________
Cuis mailing list
[hidden email]
http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
-KenD
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: #printStringLimitedTo:

Phil B
On Sat, 2015-07-18 at 21:33 -0700, Ken.Dickey wrote:
> I find it kind of odd that #printStringLimitedTo: takes the prefix of a too-long string and adds '...etc...', which itself is 9 characters.
>
> I think a shorter addition would make more sense.  After all, the string is already too long, right?
>
> I like '[..]' , which is only four characters.
>
> Would anyone else like to weigh in on this?  Other options?

I agree that the current suffix is long-ish and like your [..] idea as
that's unlikely to appear in the majority of strings but would still
convey the information.

> -KenD
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org



_______________________________________________
Cuis mailing list
[hidden email]
http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: #printStringLimitedTo:

Hannes Hirzel
Ken you ask about other options

one would be to have a method


#printStringLimitedTo:suffix:

so that people can have their own suffix.

Might be better in a multilingual environment.

However  '...etc...' is pretty general.

No objection if it stays as is.

--HH

On 7/19/15, Phil (list) <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Sat, 2015-07-18 at 21:33 -0700, Ken.Dickey wrote:
>> I find it kind of odd that #printStringLimitedTo: takes the prefix of a
>> too-long string and adds '...etc...', which itself is 9 characters.
>>
>> I think a shorter addition would make more sense.  After all, the string
>> is already too long, right?
>>
>> I like '[..]' , which is only four characters.
>>
>> Would anyone else like to weigh in on this?  Other options?
>
> I agree that the current suffix is long-ish and like your [..] idea as
> that's unlikely to appear in the majority of strings but would still
> convey the information.
>
>> -KenD
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cuis mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>

_______________________________________________
Cuis mailing list
[hidden email]
http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: #printStringLimitedTo:

Juan Vuletich-4
Why not? I just did the .cs. If nobody objects, Ken' s suggestion will
be in the next commit.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

On 7/20/2015 9:41 AM, H. Hirzel wrote:

> Ken you ask about other options
>
> one would be to have a method
>
>
> #printStringLimitedTo:suffix:
>
> so that people can have their own suffix.
>
> Might be better in a multilingual environment.
>
> However  '...etc...' is pretty general.
>
> No objection if it stays as is.
>
> --HH
>
> On 7/19/15, Phil (list)<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> On Sat, 2015-07-18 at 21:33 -0700, Ken.Dickey wrote:
>>> I find it kind of odd that #printStringLimitedTo: takes the prefix of a
>>> too-long string and adds '...etc...', which itself is 9 characters.
>>>
>>> I think a shorter addition would make more sense.  After all, the string
>>> is already too long, right?
>>>
>>> I like '[..]' , which is only four characters.
>>>
>>> Would anyone else like to weigh in on this?  Other options?
>> I agree that the current suffix is long-ish and like your [..] idea as
>> that's unlikely to appear in the majority of strings but would still
>> convey the information.
>>
>>> -KenD
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Cuis mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Cuis mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>


_______________________________________________
Cuis mailing list
[hidden email]
http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org