On Monday 20 September 2004 04:24 pm, Robert Klemme wrote:
> There is no transformation under the hood - neither technical nor
> conceptual: Hash#each just presents all key value pairs in some completely
> contingent order.  No special order "has imposed upon it".

Sounds like a contradiction in terms to me: "some completely contingent 
order" != "special order"?  It's still order either way. Nonetheless, even 
though a Hash by definition has no order, I doubt anything in a computer 
system lacks for order ;)

> > So, I agree with you. I just think the word 'index' is the wrong word,
> > and source of much the "confusion". If it's really needed the word
> > 'enumerator'
> > would be better.
> >
> >  each_with_enumerator{|a,e| ... }
> >
> > (Or perhaps just 'enum' for short)
>
> IMHO not.  An enumerator is somthing that does the enumeration or helps
> with it.  #each_with_key is much better.

Sorry, guess I wasn't clear enough. I didn't mean the per class methods; 
rather the common Enumerable#each_with_index method, i.e. giving it a new 
name. But David seems to like #each_with_counter anyway, which is fine with 
me.

T.