From: David Vallner <david@...>
Date: 2006-01-15T04:17:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Range#member? Oddity

On Sat, 14 Jan 2006 19:54:55 +0100, Stefan Walk <stefan.walk@gmail.com>  
wrote:

>
> [snip]
>
> Range including Enumerable is a fault of the ruby core API, because  
> (1.0..20) pretends to be enumerable (is_a? returns true, responds_to?  
> :each returns true), but is not.

That is, of course, misleading, but ranges are very commonly used in the  
special cases when they are indeed enumerable, so I can understand why  
it's defined that way in the core API. Library design isn't there to  
replace programmer brains. You could theorethically check whether the  
range endpoints are comparable, and whether the starting one defines  
#succ, and then mix in Enumerable to the Ranges that indeed are to get  
more strictly correct behaviour.

David Vallner