From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 1999-07-12T11:44:25+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:00462] Re: Now another totally different ;-)

Hello, there.

In message "[ruby-talk:00442] Re: Now another totally different ;-)"
    on 99/07/09, Clemens Hintze <c.hintze@gmx.net> writes:

|But I have another opinion! May I explain my reasons?

Sure.  In summary, I have to admit I treat Enumerable as ordered
sequence for some methods, e.g. index, sort, etc.  So I can agree with
adding a number indexing method to Enumerable.  But not [], because it
is used by Hash in different meaning.  I want methods sharing same
name also share same conceptual meaning, at least among standard class
library.

|3. I have not thought very deeply, but I would think, that every class
|   which provides an `each' method, would define a certain kind of
|   sequence then! I don't believe that there would be a class, which
|   would deliver different sequences during two successive calls of
|   e.g. Enumeration#collect. That means:
|	c = <any class import Enumeration>::new
|	# ... fill c
|        a1 = c.collect{|e| e}
|	a2 = c.collect{|e| e}
|	a1 == a2

File, for example.

|That could remain so. If appearing in conditional expressions, do it
|like now (complex operation; statement). If it appears in non-conditional
|expression, perform a method call (simple operation)!

Possible.  I'll consider.
                                                matz.