From: Robert Dober Date: 2010-06-11T01:19:12+09:00 Subject: Re: comparing objects On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Rein Henrichs wrote: > On 2010-06-10 06:59:40 -0700, Robert Dober said: > You have been presented with one in this very thread. The OP wants objects > of his class to have the correct semantics for Array#& and Hash#[], etc. The > correct answer is to implement #hash and #eql?, just as implementing <=> > provides objects of his class with the correct semantics for Array#sort. I guess you really do not know what I was talking about? Or do you just repeat the same stuff over and over again in order to convince me? overwriting #hash and #eql? breaks Hash! Why the hack should OP's usecase justify this? And it does not answer my question. Where would I like that Hash behaves accordingly to the redefined #eql? and #hash. And BTW I asked Wilson, did I not? Cheers Robert -- The best way to predict the future is to invent it. -- Alan Kay