From: dblack@...
Date: 2006-08-30T08:44:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Collections of structured-data objects: what approach?

Hi --

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Graham Wideman wrote:

>>> [...Ruby for Rail's Collection chapter's description of "insert"...]
>> If so, that's simply wrong.
>
> Yep, so it seems!

Actually I don't talk about Array#insert, so my description of it
can't be wrong :-)

> PickAxe's "Containers" etc chapter manages to get us all the way to lambda
> functions and closures, but its "SongList" example is too simple to be as
> useful as your examples above.
>
> Meanwhile, Ruby for Rails' "Collections, containers" etc chapter says the
> following (emphasis mine):
>
> -----------------------------
> 11.2.2 Inserting, retrieving and removing array elements
> Because an array is an ordered collection, any object you add to the array
> goes either at the beginning, at the end, or somewhere in the middle. The
> most general technique for INSERTING one or more items into an array is the
> setter method []= (square brackets...
> -----------------------------
>
> ... and goes on to give "insert" examples which do not insert, they simply
> assign to an array slot.  (And there's no mention of the insert method). So
> I had written off array as being the complete answer, since its supposed
> insert syntax "obviously" didn't really know how to insert.

Yeah, I tend to use the term "insert" sort of generically; and the
insert method is among the many methods that didn't make the "for
Rails" cut.  (Keep in mind that R4R isn't a complete Ruby core method
reference.)

But I can see that using a method name as an informal way to describe
what another method does might be awkward.


David

-- 
                   David A. Black | dblack@wobblini.net
Author of "Ruby for Rails"   [1] | Ruby/Rails training & consultancy [3]
DABlog (DAB's Weblog)        [2] | Co-director, Ruby Central, Inc.   [4]
[1] http://www.manning.com/black | [3] http://www.rubypowerandlight.com
[2] http://dablog.rubypal.com    | [4] http://www.rubycentral.org