From: nobu.nokada@...
Date: 2002-01-25T10:22:59+09:00
Subject: Re: Serious Array Bug in Ruby 1.6.6?

Hi,

At Fri, 25 Jan 2002 03:55:26 +0900,
Dave Thomas <Dave@PragmaticProgrammer.com> wrote:
> > |Hmmm, I'll suggest to change Array.new to take a block when
> > |no default value given.  That is:
> > |
> > |  a = Array.new(2) {|i| Hash.new} # i is 0, 1...
> > 
> > Instead, how about Array#fetch to take block for the default value?
> > (I already did in my local copy.)
> 
> Why not make the Array constructor consistent with Hash? The semantic
> seems the same.
> 
>    Array.new {|aref,i| ...}
> 
> then calling
> 
>   a[99]
> 
> would invoke the block, passing in the array and '99'. Whenever the
> block returned would be the value in the array. Isn't this the way
> Hash.new works?

I thought it too, but the problem is struct RArray has no more
space to keep the block.  Add to aux?

-- 
Nobu Nakada