[#3726] Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>

Hi --

15 messages 2004/11/12
[#3749] Re: Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2004/11/16

Hi --

[#3751] Re: Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2004/11/16

Hi,

[#3752] Re: Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2004/11/16

Hi --

[#3785] The latest 1.8.2 cvs prints parse error when starting extension compiling — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>

Hi,

13 messages 2004/11/23
[#3787] Re: The latest 1.8.2 cvs prints parse error when starting extension compiling — Johan Holmberg <holmberg@...> 2004/11/23

Re: Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions

From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2004-11-27 02:04:02 UTC
List: ruby-core #3830
Hi --

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: Fixnum#clone and Float#clone raise different exceptions"
>     on Thu, 25 Nov 2004 22:49:20 +0900, Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> writes:
> 
> |4.clone -> 4 sounds better to me, but I must be missing something.
> 
> Do you accept the following behavior?
> 
>   a = 4
>   a.instance_eval{@a=5}
>   b = a.clone		# b = 4
>   b.instance_eval{@a=10}
>   a.instance_eval{@a}   # @a = 10
> 
> Similar thing can happen for a Float and singleton methods.

I don't like it -- but even more fundamentally, "clone" really is
never the right name for a method that returns self.  A clone is by
definition not the original, however much it may be like the original.  


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net


In This Thread