From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2004-10-08T09:08:02+09:00
Subject: Re: Range behavior (Re: [RCR] New [] Semantics)

Hi,

In message "Re: Range behavior (Re: [RCR] New [] Semantics)"
    on Fri, 8 Oct 2004 01:19:21 +0900, "trans.  (T. Onoma)" <transami@runbox.com> writes:

|A BIG question that comes to mind after reading your post is this: What do 
|people usually use Range for? Is it continuous or discrete? I know there is 
|some of both, but I wonder if one far exceeds the other. Hopefully yes, b/c I 
|think the solution must basically fall to something like this:

<snip>

Define the problem to solve.  What do you want to fix?

Ranges serving both continuous and discrete?  Or "member?" and
"include?"  behaving differently?  Or having fun with designing
ranges?  Or something else?

For your note, I refuse to separate continuous ranges and discrete
ranges.  In Ruby, I'd rather choose classes to have multiple purpose.
For example, arrays can be served as stack, queue, etc.  I feel same
to ranges too.

I thought "member?" (which means item is included in the member set of
enumeration) and "include?" (which means item is included between
upper and lower bound) can be easily distinguished.

I have several ideas, but I have to know what is the problem first.

							matz.