From: Thomas Enebo <Thomas.Enebo@...>
Date: 2006-10-19T23:31:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Symbol < String in Ruby > 1.8

Sam Roberts wrote:
> >>I still don't understand why there is Symbol at all in Ruby<<, 
> though, it
> seems that it could be entirely replaced by String, UNLESS it does
> something faster/better than just String#freeze. I know the object_ids
> are the same, but using Symbol instead of String doesn't seem to make
> comparisons fast, at least in ruby code (maybe it is faster in C?).
>
>   
This is an interesting question (stuff between >> <<) to me also.   I 
guess saying something requires immutable strings would be fine and if 
you passed a mutable one it would generate an immutable one (most 
functions accept string now and to_sym it).  Is Symbol as subclass of 
String more useful than String which can be mutable or immutable? 

I guess there are always more than one way to skin a cat, but I am 
trying to understand motivation (perhaps backwards compatibility?)?

-Tom