Re: Pathname#walk for traversing path nodes (patch)

Hi --

On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, mathew wrote:

> ES wrote:
>
>> The absolute best name would be simply #each (incidentally, looks like
>> it would be available). That failing, #walk, #traverse or #each_node.
>
>
> I'd like to suggest "descend", because it's really descending into the path 
> provided.

The thing is, though, it isn't really descending.  The path may not
even exist.  It's just moving from left to right through a bunch of
tokens, which may or may not correspond to a real filesystem.  If it
were really a full traversal, you'd get:

   a
   a/b
   a/b/c
   a/b/c/d

*plus* whatever else branched off of b, c, and d.

whereas what we're talking about here, as I understand it, is:

   a
   b
   c
   d

which is much more just a list of components than a recursive traversal.


David

-- 
David A. Black
[e-mail]