[#2617] irb for 1.5.x — Andrew Hunt <Andy@...>
5 messages
2000/05/03
[#2639] OT: Japanese names — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
4 messages
2000/05/09
[#2643] Ruby Toplevel — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
7 messages
2000/05/09
[#2656] Re: Append alias for Array.append? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Hideto ISHIBASHI:
5 messages
2000/05/09
[#2660] win OLE / eRuby — Andrew Hunt <Andy@...>
8 messages
2000/05/09
[#2663] Re: win OLE / eRuby — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
>At Tue, 9 May 2000 09:14:51 -0400,
4 messages
2000/05/09
[#2667] The reference manual is now online — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
6 messages
2000/05/09
[#2668] Re: The reference manual is now online — schneik@...
4 messages
2000/05/09
[#2702] Re: Append alias for Array.append? — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>
>From: Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@cinnober.com>
7 messages
2000/05/10
[#2752] RE: Array.pop and documentation [was: Append al ias for Array.append?] — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
6 messages
2000/05/11
[#2758] Re: irb install — Andrew Hunt <andy@...>
>|Excellent! Will you consider adding mod_ruby to install_app as
7 messages
2000/05/11
[#2777] Re: irb install
— "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...>
2000/05/12
Hi,
[#2764] More code browsing questions — Albert Wagner <alwagner@...>
I see some class definitions contain "include" and "extend" statements.
6 messages
2000/05/12
[#2843] Re: editors for ruby — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
(Posted on comp.lang.ruby and ruby-talk ML.)
6 messages
2000/05/17
[#2874] RE: simple httpd for local use — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
> I personally use it for access to full-text indexed linux
6 messages
2000/05/18
[#2875] Re: simple httpd for local use
— hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>
2000/05/18
On Thu, 18 May 2000 09:10:28 +0200, Aleksi Niemelwrote:
[#2920] SWIG: virtual variable? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...>
hello,
4 messages
2000/05/22
[#2928] FYI: What our Python friends are up to. — "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Hi,
8 messages
2000/05/22
[#2964] Thank you — h.fulton@...
Thanks, Matz (and others) for your replies to
4 messages
2000/05/24
[#2973] Re: Socket.getnameinfo — ts <decoux@...>
>>>>> "D" == Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> writes:
10 messages
2000/05/25
[#3016] rbconfig.rb — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>
5 messages
2000/05/28
[#3039] Re: Final for World Series: Python vs Ruby — "Dat Nguyen" <thucdat@...>
1 message
2000/05/30
[#3058] FailureClass? — Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Question arising from the FAQ:
7 messages
2000/05/31
[ruby-talk:02723] Re: Append alias for Array.append?
From:
"Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@...>
Date:
2000-05-11 02:59:00 UTC
List:
ruby-talk #2723
From: Dave Thomas
> Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@dmu.ac.uk> writes:
>
> > But prepend means append to the beginning. It does not undo an append.
> > "unappend" is getting a bit long...
>
> I'm not sure I should be weighing in here, but I really don't like
> this idea of building all these aliases into the language,
> particularly when the language already provides facilities to allow
> users to add their own aliases.
>
> Rather than having <<, push, append, tackOnTheEnd, enQueue, and all
> the rest, why not have just one (say <<) and then distribute a
Wait! Stop right there!
Don't ruin a Good Idea (tm(tm(...))) by distributing oxymoronic standard
deviations (tm(tm(...))). To new Ruby users, that would be tantamount to
implementing the principle of increasing surprises.
I prefer just one standard set of method names for the same reason I prefer
just one standard set of keywords. (I realize that backwards compatibility
will preclude achieving this until Ruby 3000, but this design goal should
hold for everything new.)
I'm not sure that the set {<<, ...} is the right choice here, but only
because I haven't tried looking up the other corresponding equivalents to
the set {push, pop, shift, unshift} to make sure they all exist.
I have a slight preference for {push, pop, shift, unshift} because they are
more mnemonic, because they are more widely used by Ruby's biggest relative
(i.e. Perl), and because << has another meaning in math and because it has
still another meaning in C. But in any case, I would still prefer even {<<,
...} if the only other choise was multiple aliases.
In rare occasions you may want 1 or 2 aliases to round out what is realized
in retrospect to be some nearly systematic set of methods with respect to
some paradigm or organizing principle, but this consideration doesn't apply
to this case.
The use of multiple aliases makes it more difficult to follow other people's
programs, and it also makes learning Ruby more work and more confusing for
beginners (on the overall average)--which is directly contrary to the way
that good people (tm(tm(...))) want Ruby to be.
Conrad