The Erlang way: don't care about the order of arrival of
the messages,
and let the developer care about that when it's important.
Yes, a simple example when i need to have correct order: Collection>>do:
to print an array i'll have all items ordered from start to end , not in random order.
And of course there are cases, when i don't need to have items iterated in specific order. When i simply need to visit all items in collection to send a message to them.
So, we need at least 2 messages to reflect a different behaviour: #do: and #orderedDo:
and that's only the simplest case...
Giovanni
Are you sure Igor? why you will a developer use an OrderedCollection if he/she don't care about order? I think is more proper to use a aSet or aBag even to perform something to the elements of that ordered collection in an unordered way instead of (pre)asuming how #do: implements the traversal.
Perhaps you found another contraexample/s.
Cheers,
Sebastian