From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2000-07-06T19:55:19+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:03878] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil

Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:03862] Re: Array.uniq! returning nil"
    on 00/07/06, "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker@jump.net> writes:

|> I can agree with the possibility of the combination of modify/copy,
|> modified-or-unmodified-string/modified-string-or-nil.  But I don't
|> feel '?' is a good name sign for it.
|
|Neither do I.
|
|However, there don't seem to be many alternative characters that wouldn't
|look too strange, confusing, or cryptic. Maybe just @, $, %, &.

Other noise characters?  Come on. ;-)

Currently I feel no need for self-modifying, non-conditional
combination.  Basicly one should use copying (non-bang) version of the
methods.  When he/she really wants to enhance performance, then he/she
can use bang version at the risk of himself/herself.  I think you can
pay the cost of making new local variable for the performance tuning,
which is impossible for Python's immutable strings.

							matz.