correction [was: Re: [FIX] SortedCollectionFix-sr]

I wrote:
<...>
> Dictionary>>keysSortedSafely
>       "Answer a SortedCollection containing the receiver's keys."
>       | sortedKeys |
>       sortedKeys _ SortedCollection new: self size.
>       sortedKeys sortBlock:
>               [:x :y |  "Should really be use <obj, string, num> 
> compareSafely..."
>               ((x isString and: [y isString])
>                       or: [x isNumber and: [y isNumber]])
>                       ifTrue: [x < y]
>                       ifFalse: [x class == y class
>                               ifTrue: [x printString < y printString]
>                               ifFalse: [x class name < y class name]]].
>       self keysDo: [:each | sortedKeys addLast: each].
>       ^ sortedKeys reSort
> 
> This seems to be safe, since >>reSort is called in every case, but using
> SortedCollection>>addAll: seems to be better here.
> 
> But let's take a look at
> SortedCollection>>
> addAll: aCollection
>       aCollection size > (self size // 3)
>               ifTrue:
>                       [aCollection do: [:each | super addLast: each].
>                       self reSort]
>               ifFalse: [aCollection do: [:each | self add: each]].
>       ^ aCollection
> 


> Now I see a problem: the implementor (sma) of Dictionary>>keysSortedSafely
> possibly has seen, that in his case each element would be added one by one,
> instead of adding all unsorted followed by a reSort. And then he has tried
> to optimize it...

This statement is wrong!

Calling SortedCollection>>addAll: with a temporarily constructed
OrderedCollection containing the keys unsorted would lead to the "self
reSort" case. Don't know, what I've seen here.

Sorry,

Stephan

<...>