[dojo-contributors] [feedback wanted] Preferred Iterationforms

Scott J. Miles sjmiles at turbophp.com
Wed Apr 12 17:13:12 EDT 2006


For the record Tom, whatever you decide on goes as far as I'm concerned.
That is, I can be ignored without offense. :)
 
>> it was the separation of [current/next] that caused the headaches in the
first place 
 
Ok, I see that Java uses 'next' by convention to mean 'get the next object'
which is logical. .NET iterators work as I described (except they don't have
an atEnd( ) function, afaik).

Regards,
Scott J. Miles
TurboAjax Group
http://www.turboajax.com
   
________________________________

From: dojo-contributors-bounces at dojotoolkit.org
[mailto:dojo-contributors-bounces at dojotoolkit.org] On Behalf Of Tom Trenka
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 1:44 PM
To: dojo dev.
Subject: Re: [dojo-contributors] [feedback wanted] Preferred Iterationforms

Scott,
I had combined your next and current, and in all honesty I'd prefer to keep
it that way; it was the separation of the two that caused the headaches in
the first place (the originals used moveNext(), which returned the value of
atEnd, and apparently that caused some misunderstandings about how the
iterators worked which leads us to where we are today). 

Under my suggestion here, current() would return you the current item *and*
advance the internal cursor.  I would provide an "item" property only if
someone, for some reason, needed to gain another reference to the current
item in the collection.  But I would expect the dev to be using current()
and atEnd(). 

trt

On 4/12/06, Scott J. Miles <sjmiles at turbophp.com> wrote: 

	Seems like we went down this road already, but because I can't keep
my mouth shut, I still say this is my personal preference:
	 
	it.atEnd( ) -> boolean EOI indicator
	it.next( ) -> advance position, return value of it.atEnd()
	it.current( ) -> return current item
	 
<snip>

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.4.1/310 - Release Date: 4/12/2006
 




More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list