From: ahoward <ahoward@...>
Date: 2003-06-18T06:07:50+09:00
Subject: Re: [RCR] Array#push(empty array expanded) => no exception

On Wed, 18 Jun 2003, Hal E. Fulton wrote:

> If you think about it, it makes sense.

mostly.

> For one thing, what if a variable is passed in?  We don't want it to fail
> just because the array is empty.

well this is not *exactly* the case simon described though is it?

  method []	  # empty array as arg
  method *[]	  # NO args!

so, it's not that the method is failing just because an empty array is passed
in, it is failing because an empty array was exploded, yielding and
non-existent parameter list.  i may be in the minority, but it's not THAT
counter intuitive for me that attempting to call a method expecting args, with
no args, should be an error.

> For another thing, consider what happens with
> strings. foo = "value" + "" should not be
> illegal, I think.

no, of course not.  but this is analogous to the first example above, not the
second one, which would be more along the lines of

  foo = "value" + *""

if '*String' did, for example, an explosion into a list of Fixnums (chars) or
something like that...

-a
--
  ====================================
  | Ara Howard
  | NOAA Forecast Systems Laboratory
  | Information and Technology Services
  | Data Systems Group
  | R/FST 325 Broadway
  | Boulder, CO 80305-3328
  | Email: ara.t.howard@noaa.gov
  | Phone:  303-497-7238
  | Fax:    303-497-7259
  | ~ > ruby -e 'p(%.\x2d\x29..intern)'
  ====================================