At 4:08 PM +0200 10/10/06, TSa wrote:
Darren Duncan wrote:
Within a system that already has an underlying set-like type, the
Junction in this case, a test for uniqueness is (pardon any
all(@items).elements.size === @items.size
The all() will strip any duplicates, so if the number of elements
in all(@items) is the same as @items, then @items has no duplicates.
OK, but you are not using the 'set with additional behavior' of
junctions. How would that be spelled with a pure set?
set(@items).elements.size === @items.size
perhaps? This would nicely blend with the junction forms.
Yes, that is exactly how it would be spelled with a pure set. In
fact, your example is the more normal one, in that simply turning a
collection into a set removes duplicates. I used all() in my example
because that is the Junction equivalent of making a set that contains
all distinct members of @items. -- Darren Duncan