From: Mark Slagell <ms@...>
Date: 2002-12-23T12:12:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Hash#update

Austin Ziegler wrote:

>On Mon, 23 Dec 2002 08:05:00 +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>
>>In message "Re: Hash#update"
>>on 02/12/23, Mark Slagell <ms@iastate.edu> writes:
>>| As you say, non-commutative '+' is common enough in programming.
>>| Array#+ is another example. Consider also that there is an
>>| intuitive |temporal sense to these expressions. In (hash1 +
>>| hash2), we are starting with hash1. After hash2 is brought into
>>| the picture, the newer bits would be expected to take precedence.
>>| I don't really see a problem here.
>>No information lost by String#+ or Array#+, but Hash#update may
>>lose the value. That's why I rejected the name "+". It is possible
>>to provide the non destructive "update" under different name. Good
>>name?
>>
>
>Hash#union, also Hash#| (not Hash#^).
>
>-austin
>-- Austin Ziegler, austin@halostatue.ca on 2002.12.22 at 20.57.15
>
>
Yes.  Can we have both?

  --Mark