From: "Erik Bågfors" <erik@...>
Date: 2002-01-25T23:21:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Serious Array Bug in Ruby 1.6.6?

On Fri, 2002-01-25 at 15:11, Bill Tj wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>     a = Array.new (n, something)
> 
> will create n copies of that something?  If that something is a
> numeric or a literal string, all n members refer to the same object. 
> But if that something is a container, at least, then Ruby should
> create n different container objects.

Personally I think it's _very_ clear.
 
------------------------------------------------------------- Array::new
     Array.new( anInteger=0, anObject=nil ) -> anArray
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Returns a new array, optionally with a size and initial value (that
     is, anInteger references to the same anObject).
        Array.new                #=> []
        Array.new(2)             #=> [nil, nil]
        Array.new(5, "A")        #=> ["A", "A", "A", "A", "A"]
        Array.new(2, Hash.new)   #=> [{}, {}]

it sais "anObject".  It even gives "nil" as default.  It's one object. 
Why should it create many objects??  I'm really not following you here.


The way I see it.
Array.new(2,Hash.new) is the same as
h = Hash.new
Array.new(2,h)

and that's very clear. It would break my POLS if it was in anotherway.

Also trying to eval this by hand trying to guess how the interpeter does
it would be like this

Array.new(2, Hash.new) -> Array.new(2, {}) # that is.. Hash.new is done
before Array.new.  I don't know if this is what happens but in my head
that's it :)

Now, I really think that what you want to do should be possible but it
shouldn't be in that way.

/Erik

-- 
Erik B�gfors               | erik@bagfors.nu
Supporter of free software | GSM +46 733 279 273
fingerprint: 6666 A85B 95D3 D26B 296B 6C60 4F32 2C0B 693D 6E32