From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-01-09T19:06:03+09:00
Subject: Re: a most undangerous Hash#store!

------=_Part_39817_27912791.1168337161014
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

On 1/9/07, Trans <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Mauricio Fernandez wrote:
>
> > Anyway, Trans was talking about destructive updates, so what about
> >
> >   def store?(key, value)
> >     unless key?(key)
> >       store(key,value)
> >       return true
> >     end
> >     false
> >   end
> >
> > similar to the #store! he described, but with a more regular behavior
> when you
> > have nil/false values...
>
> well, i was thinking of combining Mr. Haines  idea with Mr. James to
> get #store_new, which seemed just about right. but now your suggestion
> is quite interesting. at first i wasn't so sure, but thinking about it
> a little more it makes sense -- "is something stored with this key? if
> not store this value with it". i was also worried that it did not
> return the stored value like the normal store, but i realize now that
> could be ambigious if value=nil, so you may be on point. is that right?
> if so then i have to go with your suggestion.
>
> t.
>
>
> Please reconsider making an updating predicate Tom! (no pun intended) I
was not joking above I *really* feel that is a very bad idea.

Your semantic interpretation of "?" makes sense but only without
consideration of the context of what all other "?" methods do.

Cheers
Robert


-- 
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
- Alan Kay

------=_Part_39817_27912791.1168337161014--