[Cuis-dev] Why can't you send to super on private (pvt*) methods?

Phil B pbpublist at gmail.com
Tue Jun 11 10:43:09 PDT 2019

Ah, then count me as a firm 'yes' vote!  I've been in favor of that forever
as I agree making things explicitly pvt* removes any possible
misinterpretation.  The only problem is that many (most?) the senders of
those set* methods tend to come from class-side so pvt* visibility would
have to extend there as well for this to work. (What I tend to do currently
for those cases in my code currently is use a private* prefix.)

On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 1:28 PM Juan Vuletich <juan at jvuletich.org> wrote:

> On 6/10/2019 8:15 PM, Phil B wrote:
> Why do you think the #privateSetX:setY: looks silly?  I think it's a
>> decent placeholder that I read as saying 'we really want this to be
>> immutable and are indicating this as private to reflect that fact until we
>> can actually make it immutable via the VM'
> Because the comment begs you not to call it. If we just add the pvt
> prefix, then it is way more robust. You need to add a new method to set the
> ivars, and clearly you are on your own then.
> Private categories are good for getting methods out of the way in the main
> browser but I'm not wild about them beyond that.  The main issue I have
> with private categories is that they are so easy to overlook in the
> browsers.  For example, if you're in the message finder and you do a search
> on 'set', the fact that it shows up as private* makes it very clear that
> it's not a method you should be using generally.  If the private prefix
> were removed, you'd have to be sure to select an implementor in the right
> pane (and hope that they are consistently categorized) and then be sure to
> look for the category buried in the method annotation below (which might be
> 'private' or 'private - someSubCategory' etc)... ugh!  Or if you see a raw
> selector (i.e. #setX:setY:) in code now you have to do the above as opposed
> to just looking at the selector name.
> That said, if it really bugs you or others, I will live without the
> prefix.  But I do find it helpful.
> Thanks,
> Phil
> I'm suggesting the opposite! To start adding the pvt prefix to methods we
> intend to be private (i.e. those already in a 'private*' category).
> Cheers,
> --
> Juan Vuletichwww.cuis-smalltalk.orghttps://github.com/Cuis-Smalltalk/Cuis-Smalltalk-Devhttps://github.com/jvuletichhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/juan-vuletich-75611b3
> @JuanVuletich
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20190611/bcd5eda6/attachment-0001.htm>

More information about the Cuis-dev mailing list