From: Markus <markus@...>
Date: 2004-10-13T00:12:35+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby Directions (was Re: quality of error messages)

On Tue, 2004-10-12 at 00:09, Robert Klemme wrote:
> Regardless of whether Ranges should rather be immutable or not, I plead
> for sticking with the current immutability.  The reason is simply that a
> change of mutability of a class is a major change, which is likely to
> break a lot of code.  Everybody that relied on a Range being immutable and
> thus stored an instance as member of his own classes might recognize the
> range suddenly changed when it's no longer immutable.

     I'm not sure I understand your point; could you provide an example
of how this might happen?  Specifically, how code that did not attempt
to modify something would be affected if it became, in theory, possible
to modify it.  Or am I misunderstanding?

     -- Markus