From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2005-01-14T18:51:12+09:00
Subject: Re: request for times, step, upto...


"Pe単a, Botp" <botp@delmonte-phil.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:20050114070636.2F2EB83F5@mx2.delmonte-phil.com...
> Hi,
>
> 1. I am a Integer#times fan :-) So you see my (and my kids) nuby codes
> littered w it. I have a small request though.
> Can we pass initial and step params?
>
> ie
>
> from int.times {|i| block }
>
> to int.times(starting=0, step=1) {|i| block }
>
> I hope this would not break old code, right?

Sure, but semantics of this method will be broken.  The block will no
longer execute int times.  We have #step for that as know.

> 2. my request may be handled by step. But I do not like step (me only);
> maybe because the sound does not ring or maybe because I do not like the
> order of params when read.

Ah, so you *do* care about the correlation between semantics and method
names.

> iow
>
> from num.step(limit, step ) {|i| block },
>
> I prefer fr_num.step(step, upto ) {|i| block }
>
> since I would read the ff 1.step(2,5) {|x| p x} as
> "from 1 step 2 up to 5" (I know this would break old code)
>
> I feel Integer#upto has a better read -"int.upto(limit) {|i| block }",
but
> sadly #upto has no steps either :(

That could be added.  And it would be a resonable and good change IMHO.
Same for #downto btw.

> thanks for reading =)

Thanks for calling. :-)

Kind regards

    robert