I agree with Nicolas, but I think that it's really important that we
have this discussion, reach a consensus, and them implement it!
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
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
