From: "Ara.T.Howard" <ara.t.howard@...>
Date: 2005-11-24T09:38:11+09:00
Subject: Re: [BUG] string range membership

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: [BUG] string range membership"
>    on Thu, 24 Nov 2005 01:03:19 +0900, "Warren Brown" <warrenbrown@aquire.com> writes:
>
> |So, given that (at least in the case of ranges of strings) there is a
> |clear distinction between a value being included in the interval and a
> |value being included in the set, it appears that we have a real need for
> |two different methods.  The methods Range#include? (in interval) and
> |Range#member? (of set) seem to be perfect candidates for these two
> |different functionalities.  Before these two methods were merged, did
> |they take on these two functionalities, or were they different in some
> |other way?
>
> #include? used for range check, #member? was for set membership.  But
> since they have same functionality in Enumerable, some claimed having
> different behaviors in Range was confusing.  I agreed.
>
> |    Anyway, please let me know if there is anything I can do to help
> |settle this issue.
>
> All we need is making up good names for each functionality.

   Range#contains?

??

-a
-- 
===============================================================================
| ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| all happiness comes from the desire for others to be happy.  all misery
| comes from the desire for oneself to be happy.
| -- bodhicaryavatara
===============================================================================