From: "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
Date: 2005-10-18T00:37:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Set.new vs Set[]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Damphyr [mailto:damphyr@freemail.gr] 
> Sent: Saturday, October 15, 2005 2:48 PM
> To: ruby-talk ML
> Subject: Re: Set.new vs Set[]
> 
> 
> Daniel Berger wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > Ruby 1.8.3
> > 
> > irb(main):001:0> require "set"
> > => true
> > 
> > irb(main):002:0> a = [0,1,2,3,4,5,2,3]
> > => [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 2, 3]
> > 
> > irb(main):003:0> set1 = Set.new(a)
> > => #<Set: {5, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4}>
> > 
> > irb(main):004:0> set2 = Set[a]
> > => #<Set: {[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 2, 3]}>
> > 
> > Shouldn't the set returned by Set[] also be only the unique values?
> Nope, you just made a Set with an array as an element in the 
> second example. In the first one you have the elements of the 
> array inserted in the set, 
> not the array itself.
> Cheers,
> V.-

Whoops, you're right.  I should have noticed that.  Anyway, I think I'll
submit a documentation patch, since the difference between Set[] and
Set.new isn't very well spelled out (to me, anyway).

Thanks.

Dan