Laurent Sansonetti
lsans****@apple*****
Sun Sep 9 02:39:11 JST 2007
I vote for this :)
What do others think?
Laurent
On Sep 8, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Eloy Duran wrote:
> Ok, so do we then settle on the following?
>
> #<NSCFString "foo">
>
> #<NSCFArray [#<NSCFString "foo">, #<NSCFNumber 99.99>]>
>
> #<NSCFNumber 99.99>
> #<NSCFNumber true>
> #<NSCFNumber 42>
>
> #<NSDictionary {#<NSCFString "foo"> => #<NSCFNumber 42>}>
>
> On 9/8/07, Laurent Sansonetti <lsans****@apple*****> wrote:
>> I think we should keep the full class names. It's important for
>> consistency, since all other #inspect methods return them. We could
>> nevertheless drop the OSX prefix in all #inspect methods.
>>
>> The IDs are interesting to determine if 2 objects of the same value
>> are different instances, or the same object. Originally I was
>> thinking
>> about keeping them too, but I revised by judgment. ObjC doesn't
>> reveal
>> them in the primitive types [-description] methods, so we shouldn't
>> need too. One can still call #ocid to determine the ObjC address.
>>
>> Laurent
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2007, at 1:12 PM, Eloy Duran wrote:
>>
>>> Hey Satoshi-san,
>>>
>>> I think we should at least show the full classname, so
>>> OSX::NSCFString etc.
>>>
>>> The id's are indeed a point of debate, because also with ruby's
>>> String, Array, Hash, and Numeric the #inspect method doesn't show
>>> the
>>> id....
>>>
>>> Eloy
>>>
>>> On 9/8/07, Satoshi Nakagawa <snaka****@infot*****> wrote:
>>>> Hi.
>>>>
>>>> I prefer shorter form.
>>>>
>>>> <NSString "foo">
>>>> <NSNumber 99.99>
>>>> <NSArray [<NSString "foo">, <NSNumber 99.99>]>
>>>> <NSDictionary {<NSString "foo"> => <NSNumber 42>}>
>>>>
>>>> or
>>>>
>>>> <NS "foo">
>>>> <NS 99.99>
>>>> <NS [<NS "foo">, <NS 99.99>]>
>>>> <NS {<NS "foo"> => <NS 42>}>
>>>>
>>>> Because these types are value types, so we don't need to
>>>> know their ids.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Satoshi Nakagawa
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Rubycocoa-devel mailing list
>>>> Rubyc****@lists*****
>>>> http://lists.sourceforge.jp/mailman/listinfo/rubycocoa-devel
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Rubycocoa-devel mailing list
>>> Rubyc****@lists*****
>>> http://lists.sourceforge.jp/mailman/listinfo/rubycocoa-devel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rubycocoa-devel mailing list
>> Rubyc****@lists*****
>> http://lists.sourceforge.jp/mailman/listinfo/rubycocoa-devel
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Rubycocoa-devel mailing list
> Rubyc****@lists*****
> http://lists.sourceforge.jp/mailman/listinfo/rubycocoa-devel