From: Nikolai Weibull <mailing-lists.ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2005-03-21T00:26:55+09:00
Subject: Re: RCR 296: Destructive methods return self

* Glenn Parker (Mar 20, 2005 16:00):
> > Well, the problem is that a String is represented by one long
> > sequence of bytes in memory.

> AFAIK, that is not actually a requirement for a Ruby implementation.

What does that mean?  That is how it's implemented in Ruby.  There's no
definition of how Ruby should be implemented.  The implementation is the
standard.  That isn't to say that they are the final word of how a
String should be represented, but if it will, in a future release, be
represented in some other way, perhaps having destructive versus
non-destructive methods will make no sense,
        nikolai

-- 
::: name: Nikolai Weibull    :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA    :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden    :::
::: page: minimalistic.org   :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}