gabriele renzi wrote:

> Zach Dennis ha scritto:
>
>> How range operators work seems sort of backwards to me. It would 
>> appear as if the "..." (three dots) would be the inclusive one, 
>> including the last value and the ".." (two dots) would be exclusive 
>> and exclude the last value.
>
>
> actually, I thought till one moment ago that ... was going to be 
> deprecated. I looked up and found that I misremembered this:
> http://www.rubyist.net/~matz/slides/rc2003/mgp00025.html
>
> I'd strongly advocate the elimination of z...y .
> It is completely non obvious, and it has no advantage _i can see_ over 
> x..k .
>
I agree.

>
> Maybe you can submit an rcr about it, you'll get many positive votes, 
> I guess.
>
Did you mean to say "Submit RCR, you may get many votes"  or "you could 
submit RCR and get many possible votes, but I dont think it's worthwhile"?


> PS
> I also think that if x...k disappear we could have an x.. literal, 
> (equivalent to x..-1 to express unlimited Ranges) without ambiguity.
>
> I would love to have :
> 'ciao'[1..]=='iao' #=>true
> instead of
> 'ciao'[1..-1]=='iao' #=>true

I will have to do some more thinking on this. I do not know if I like 
the idea of an infinite Range. It may do more harm then good, but I will 
have to think it out more carefully before I settle at a conclusion.

Zach