Re: "destructiveness" of delete

> There were no big reason than "they had different origins" as I stated
> before.  Probably it was wrong naming, I admit.  I'm afraid that
> unifiying behavior (to either direction) would cause serious problems
> more than it would solve.  Any realistic idea, anyone?

idea:
for the next release, create an alias String#delete_char
for String#delete, and deprecate String#delete until 
next major release, then effectively dropping it in two 
major releases from now.

This approach has been used before to differentiate
"each" from "each_line".



On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 10:03:51 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto
<[e-mail]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: "destructiveness" of delete"
>     on 04/09/01, "David A. Black" <[e-mail]> writes:
> 
> |I don't either, but I think the question of how "delete" relates to
> |"delete!" is separate.  I would favor unification, not because strings
> |should be similar to arrays but to avoid having two conflicting
> |rationales (even if one of them has been forgotten :-) for how
> |"delete[!]" relates to its receiver.
> 
> There were no big reason than "they had different origins" as I stated
> before.  Probably it was wrong naming, I admit.  I'm afraid that
> unifiying behavior (to either direction) would cause serious problems
> more than it would solve.  Any realistic idea, anyone?
> 
>                                                         matz.
> 
> 


-- 
--- vruz