From: "David A. Black" Date: 2005-10-08T00:20:07+09:00 Subject: Re: select! not present but reject! is Hi -- On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Jacob Fugal wrote: > On 10/7/05, David A. Black wrote: >> Hi -- >> >> On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Rob Rypka wrote: >> >>> By your logic, reject! is also wrong. johnny.reject! should reject >>> the items, and then give them to you, which is the same as your >>> select!. That's not what it does, though... >> >> See my previous post -- it shows the difference (between reject! and >> my sense of select!), which is in the return values. > > And that's where it confuses me. select and reject are complements, so > why couldn't it be expected that select! and reject! be complements as > well? Changing the semantics of select from converse of reject without > bang to synonym for reject (differing only in return value) with bang > makes no sense at all to me. I completely understand, and I'm the first to admit I've failed to convey clearly what it is that makes me not feel that the complementariness carries over to the bang versions, or why I like "select" for culling elements that pass a test but don't like "select!" for replacing the array's contents with elements that pass a test. So I'll have to leave it at that, except that if a brilliant explanatory model comes to me I'll share it :-) David -- David A. Black dblack@wobblini.net