[#4766] Wiki — "Glen Stampoultzis" <trinexus@...>

21 messages 2000/09/04
[#4768] RE: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nahi@...> 2000/09/04

Hi, Glen,

[#4783] Re: Wiki — Masatoshi SEKI <m_seki@...> 2000/09/04

[#4785] Re: Wiki — "NAKAMURA, Hiroshi" <nakahiro@...> 2000/09/05

Howdy,

[#4883] Re-binding a block — Dave Thomas <Dave@...>

16 messages 2000/09/12

[#4930] Perl 6 rumblings -- RFC 225 (v1) Data: Superpositions — Conrad Schneiker <schneik@...>

Hi,

11 messages 2000/09/15

[#4936] Ruby Book Eng. translation editor's questions — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

20 messages 2000/09/16

[#5045] Proposal: Add constants to Math — Robert Feldt <feldt@...>

15 messages 2000/09/21

[#5077] Crazy idea? infix method calls — hal9000@...

This is a generalization of the "in" operator idea which I

17 messages 2000/09/22

[#5157] Compile Problem with 1.6.1 — Scott Billings <aerogems@...>

When I try to compile Ruby 1.6.1, I get the following error:

15 messages 2000/09/27

[ruby-talk:4821] Re: Some questions

From: matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Date: 2000-09-07 06:25:26 UTC
List: ruby-talk #4821
Hi,

In message "[ruby-talk:4820] Re: Some questions"
    on 00/09/07, Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> writes:

|> Either case, somebody suppose the other one, and get confused.
|> I think each_index for String is merely a source of confusion.
|> This is the reason why there's no each_index in String.
|
|I can certainly see the problems here. But as Enumerable already
|includes #each_with_index, I thing the problem is already there. I'm
|not sure that adding #each_index to Enumerable would make it worse.

Yes, each_with_index has same problem.  But each_index is worse, since
it does not provide the value for index (and str[index] gives
completely different value).

							matz.

In This Thread