From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2008-06-03T17:41:40+09:00
Subject: Re: Set#map! vs. map

Hi,

In message "Re: Set#map! vs. map"
    on Tue, 3 Jun 2008 17:33:02 +0900, "David A. Black" <dblack@rubypal.com> writes:

|> Do you want to make a new rule that map should return the object of
|> the same class as the receiver?  If so, what do you think collect
|> (currently map's alias) should return?
|
|I wasn't thinking of a general rule, just wondering about the case of
|Set.

So, with making a general rule in your mind, what do you think?

							matz.