2009/10/26 Andrew P. Black <[email protected]>: > 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). >
This is exactly SequenceableCollection>>#hasEqualElements: I have no #sameElements: in core. Nicolas > 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 > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
