[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

why doesn't Array include Comparable

Ara.T.Howard

8/9/2006 4:14:00 AM

7 Answers

Hal E. Fulton

8/9/2006 4:57:00 AM

0

ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
>
> why __wouldn't__ one want this?
>
>
>
> harp:~ > cat a.rb
> a = 0,1,2
> b = 2,3,4
>
> p a < b rescue puts "can't do that!"
>
> class Array; include Comparable; end
>
> p a < b
>
>
> harp:~ > ruby a.rb
> can't do that!
> true
>
> ??

Offhand I would guess it's because arrays can
hold arbitrary objects.

If one array held four different classes of
objects, and another held yet another four
classes of objects, that's potentially sixteen
spaceship operators that would need to be
defined for this to make sense. And most of
those would not make sense anyway.


Hal

Logan Capaldo

8/9/2006 12:23:00 PM

0


On Aug 9, 2006, at 12:56 AM, Hal Fulton wrote:

> ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
>> why __wouldn't__ one want this?
>> harp:~ > cat a.rb
>> a = 0,1,2
>> b = 2,3,4
>> p a < b rescue puts "can't do that!"
>> class Array; include Comparable; end
>> p a < b
>> harp:~ > ruby a.rb
>> can't do that!
>> true
>> ??
>
> Offhand I would guess it's because arrays can
> hold arbitrary objects.
>
> If one array held four different classes of
> objects, and another held yet another four
> classes of objects, that's potentially sixteen
> spaceship operators that would need to be
> defined for this to make sense. And most of
> those would not make sense anyway.
>

But spaceship is already defined for array (and it does the right
thing (tm)). If Array is going to make spaceship available, why _not_
include Comparable?

>
> Hal
>


James Gray

8/9/2006 12:52:00 PM

0

On Aug 9, 2006, at 7:22 AM, Logan Capaldo wrote:

> But spaceship is already defined for array (and it does the right
> thing (tm)). If Array is going to make spaceship available, why
> _not_ include Comparable?

I have to agree. I know I've wanted it a couple of times now.

James Edward Gray II


Trans

8/9/2006 1:03:00 PM

0

Indeed I have found it useful to

class Tuple < Array
include Comparable
end

But I also make it immutable.

T.

Ara.T.Howard

8/9/2006 2:13:00 PM

0

Ara.T.Howard

8/9/2006 2:18:00 PM

0

Berger, Daniel

8/9/2006 2:49:00 PM

0

ara.t.howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, Hal Fulton wrote:
>
>> Offhand I would guess it's because arrays can
>> hold arbitrary objects.
>>
>> If one array held four different classes of
>> objects, and another held yet another four
>> classes of objects, that's potentially sixteen
>> spaceship operators that would need to be
>> defined for this to make sense. And most of
>> those would not make sense anyway.
>
> i don't understand - it's up to to the objects inside the container to
> impliment the right methods and array already knows how to handle it:
>
>
> harp:~ > cat a.rb
> a = 0, 'foo', 42
> b = 1, 'bar', 42.0
>
> p a < b rescue puts "can't do that"
>
> class Array; include Comparable; end
>
> p a < b
>
> p a.sort_by{ rand } < b.sort_by{ rand }
>
>
> harp:~ > ruby a.rb
> can't do that
> true
> a.rb:9:in `<': comparison of Array with Array failed (ArgumentError)
> from a.rb:9
>
>
> if you're collections impliment <=> correctly then Array does the right
> thing -
> looping over each of them.
>
> -a

FWIW, I modified the Array class to include Comparable and then ran both the
test_array.rb file that's distributed with the Ruby distro and my own tests in
the ruby_test project and all tests still passed.

Regards,

Dan


This communication is the property of Qwest and may contain confidential or
privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication
in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
all copies of the communication and any attachments.