From: "Peña, Botp" <botp@...>
Date: 2005-01-15T13:12:56+09:00
Subject: Re: request for times, step, upto...

Pit Captain [mailto:pit@capitain.de] wrote:
//Robert Klemme schrieb:
//> "Peña, Botp" <botp@delmonte-phil.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
//>>  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.
//
//I thought he just wanted to change the values passed into the 
//block. Instead of
//
//   0, 1, ..., n-1
//
//it would be
//
//   start, start + step, ..., start + (n-1)*step
//
//Looks useful to me.
//

Yes. you are right, sir Pit. Thank you for the explanation.
To give example, currently the family do it like this:

irb(main):011:0> class Integer
irb(main):012:1> 	  def new_times start=0, step=1
irb(main):013:2> 	      x=start
irb(main):014:2>        self.times { |i|
irb(main):015:3*             yield x
irb(main):016:3>             x += step
irb(main):017:3>        }
irb(main):018:2>    end
irb(main):019:1> end
=> nil
# note the use of #times with #new_times above to emphasize 
# similarity and suggested change

irb(main):020:0> 5.new_times {|x| p x}
0
1
2
3
4
=> 5
irb(main):021:0> 5.new_times(1) {|x| p x}
1
2
3
4
5
=> 5
irb(main):022:0> 5.new_times(1,2) {|x| p x}
1
3
5
7
9
=> 5

//Regards,
//Pit
//

kind regards -botp