From: "Joachim (München)" <wuttke1@...>
Date: 2008-04-10T20:05:07+09:00
Subject: Re: Hash insertion order preservation in ruby1.9

On 2 Apr., 03:39, Nobuyoshi Nakada <n...@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:55:12 +0900,
> Joachim (München) wrote in [ruby-talk:296442]:
>
> > (4) Once hashes are ordered, new use cases will be found, and
> > new methods will become useful. I would like to propose the following
> > new instance methods
> >    Hash#insert_before( existing_key, other_hash )
> >    Hash#insert_after( existing_key, other_hash )
> > and possibly also
> >    Hash#insert_before( existing_key, key, value )
> >    Hash#insert_after( existing_key, key, value )
> > to insert new items at well defined locations. My use case, as I
> > said before, is a hash which is dumped into human-readable yaml.
>
> What do you expect on conflicts?
>
> --
> Nobu Nakada

Sorry Nobu, I saw your question only today.

I see two possible conflicts:
- existing _key does not exist
- key already exists
Right?

I would raise an exception in both cases.

Rationale:
One could imagine several other ways to resolve conflicts.
I do not think one of them will be widely accepted as the obvious
right thing to do.
Therefore not attempting to reconcile conflicts will cause the least
surprise.

Regards, Joachim