From: Bob Hutchison <hutch@...>
Date: 2007-10-24T21:38:55+09:00
Subject: Re: pop/push, shift/unshift


On 24-Oct-07, at 6:30 AM, Todd Benson wrote:

> On 10/24/07, Todd Benson <caduceass@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not only that, but enqueue and dequeue return different objects.
>> Enqueue returns an array, and dequeue returns the object that was
>> shifted from the stack.
>>
>> Todd
>
> Hmm.  I guess shift/unshift are like that too.  Sorry for the noise.
>
> I'm surprised, though, that this thread has received so much
> attention.  I don't really have a problem with the terminology, or the
> behavior of the methods pop/push/shift/unshift.  In fact, the
> shift/unshift methods were two of many things that attracted me to
> Ruby.  I know they exist in other languages, but I haven't experienced
> the others in depth yet.

I agree with you. I don't have any problem with the terminology, and  
I certainly appreciate the implementation. The only problem I have is  
the two specific deficiencies in the optimisation of un/shift. With  
some release after 1.8.5 this should be completely resolved, it is  
much better in 1.8.5 than in 1.8.4 I think.

Cheers,
Bob

>
> Todd

----
Bob Hutchison                  -- tumblelog at http:// 
www.recursive.ca/so/
Recursive Design Inc.          -- weblog at http://www.recursive.ca/ 
hutch
http://www.recursive.ca/       -- works on http://www.raconteur.info/ 
cms-for-static-content/home/