[#5218] Ruby Book Eng tl, ch1 question — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

13 messages 2000/10/02

[#5404] Object.foo, setters and so on — "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>

OK, here is what I think I know.

14 messages 2000/10/11

[#5425] Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...>

18 messages 2000/10/11
[#5427] RE: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — OZAWA -Crouton- Sakuro <crouton@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 03:49:46 +0900,

[#5429] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Jon Babcock <jon@...> 2000/10/11

Thanks for the input.

[#5432] Re: Ruby Book Eng. tl, 9.8.11 -- seishitsu ? — Yasushi Shoji <yashi@...> 2000/10/11

At Thu, 12 Oct 2000 04:53:41 +0900,

[#5516] Re: Some newbye question — ts <decoux@...>

>>>>> "D" == Davide Marchignoli <marchign@di.unipi.it> writes:

80 messages 2000/10/13
[#5531] Re: Some newbye question — matz@... (Yukihiro Matsumoto) 2000/10/14

Hi,

[#5544] Re: Some newbye question — Davide Marchignoli <marchign@...> 2000/10/15

On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#5576] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — Dave Thomas <Dave@...> 2000/10/16

matz@zetabits.com (Yukihiro Matsumoto) writes:

[#5617] Re: local variables (nested, in-block, parameters, etc.) — "Brian F. Feldman" <green@...> 2000/10/16

Dave Thomas <Dave@thomases.com> wrote:

[#5705] Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng <hgs@...>

There has been discussion on this list/group from time to time about

16 messages 2000/10/20
[#5712] Re: Dynamic languages, SWOT ? — Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@...> 2000/10/20

Hugh Sasse Staff Elec Eng wrote:

[#5882] [RFC] Towards a new synchronisation primitive — hipster <hipster@...4all.nl>

Hello fellow rubyists,

21 messages 2000/10/26

[ruby-talk:5830] Array#insert rehashed

From: Aleksi Niemel<aleksi.niemela@...>
Date: 2000-10-24 20:54:45 UTC
List: ruby-talk #5830
As I pursued for the Array#insert some time ago, I happened to find this
"feature":

  $ ruby -v -e'a=[1,2,3]; a[1,0]=a; p a;'
  ruby 1.6.2 (2000-10-16) [i686-linux]
  [1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1]

I guess it's not as it should be. I'd expect [1, 1,2,3, 2,3].

I went on and fixed it. Then I thought that my hack to make 

  a = [1,2,3]
  p a.insert(-1, [4,5])

to output [1,2,3, [4,5]] instead of [1,2, [4,5], 3], which is produced by 

  a[-1,0]=[[4,5]]

should make it's way into Array#[]. So I changed [] to work like insert
does. Then I bumped into the problem. Backwards compatibility. I got scared.
Messing around with [] surely causes many programs to fail. Insert, however,
could work as seen fit as no one uses it yet (at least not too many).

So I'm asking:

1) Do you think we should change the way Array#[pos, len] version 
   works for next Ruby version?

    - remove surprising array[pos, 0] = [1,2,3] array flattening
    - change semantics for negative pos

2) Do you think Array#insert(pos, stuff) should work almost like 
   current Array#[pos, 0] = stuff except it doesn't autoflat?
   Or do you think negative pos too should be handled differently
   from Array#[pos,len]= ?

After some concensus on these issues we can discuss about matju's add-ons
[ruby-talk:5768], which follow the same theme.

	- Aleksi

In This Thread

Prev Next