From: Dark Ambient <sambient@...>
Date: 2006-07-10T01:16:55+09:00
Subject: Re: Sorting arrays

------=_Part_129759_5021386.1152461806778
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

David,

Thank you for your patience.  I now get it!  As you mentioned previously
the first time through your loop, lowest is nil -- which means that the
item < lowest comparison is never evaluated, second iteration (via lowest =
item) changes it.
Why I didn't see it then.

Apologies
Stuart


On 7/9/06, dblack@wobblini.net <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
>
> Hi --
>
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Dark Ambient wrote:
>
> > On 7/9/06, dblack@wobblini.net <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I don't see that in your code.  I see this:
> >>
> >>    lowest = nil
> >>
> >> So this:
> >>
> >>    lowest == nil
> >>
> >> is true.
> >
> >
> > Sorry I'm not trying to be frustrating.
> >
> > def sort(list)
> > sorted = []
> > unsorted = []
> >
> > lowest = nil    <----------- here lowest is being set to nil
> > list.each do |item|
> > if lowest == nil || item < lowest  <----then expression 1 is true (as
> you
> > say above).
>
> Correct.  Therefore this gets executed:
>
> > lowest = item
>
> So now, lowest is item -- which was "five" (or whatever the first
> array item was).
>
> So *next* time through the loop, this:
>
>    lowest == nil
>
> will *not* be true.  So this:
>
>    item < lowest
>
> will be tested instead.
>
>
> David
>
> --
> http://www.rubypowerandlight.com => Ruby/Rails training & consultancy
> http://www.manning.com/black     => RUBY FOR RAILS, the Ruby book for
>                                                      Rails developers
> http://dablog.rubypal.com        => D[avid ]A[. ]B[lack's][ Web]log
> dblack@wobblini.net              => me
>
>

------=_Part_129759_5021386.1152461806778--