From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2004-09-21T01:23:07+09:00
Subject: Re: Array#index block and rdetect

Hi --

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: Array#index block and rdetect"
>     on Mon, 20 Sep 2004 22:21:08 +0900, "David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> writes:
> 
> |Or, if index always means a (to_a-based) numerical index, then
> |#each_index should be in Enumerable, and not left to the individual
> |classes.  Then it would be clearer that index == 0-origin, possibly
> |meaningless (for unordered collections), numerical index.  Classes
> |that specialized from this could either re-use the name index (for
> |example, a 1-origin collection), or introduce a set of methods with a
> |new name/concept (like key).  
> 
> This (numerical index) is what I thought when I designed
> each_with_index.  So I vote for introducing a new name.

I liked Tom's idea of "counter".  That seems to be more what it is.  


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net