On Oct 26, 2009, at 3:02 AM, Andrew P. Black wrote:
I agree with Nicolas, but I think that it's really important that we have this discussion, reach a consensus, and them implement it!
yes yes yes. Communicating is the best way to increase the level of knowledge in the community.
That's why I posted the message here rather than just posting a bug report.
There used to be a method called hasSameElementsAs: (now called, inexplicably, sameElements:) that could be pressed into service so that two intervals, or an array and and interval, can have the same elements but still be unequal. But the role of species was to define when things could be equal...
Maybe we need a method "hasSameSequenceOfElementsAs:" which would be applicable to any pair of sequenceable collections, as well as being faster to implement, than sameElements: (which is currently quadratic).
On 25 Oct 2009, at 06:53, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
IMO, we should not let Array hash ~= Interval hash coexist with Array = Interval Because it's like putting some traps on programmers path. One day or the other an application will exhibit a non repeatable error, just because the size of a Set was different and caused a collision.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project