On Sat, 11 Dec 2004 11:17:25 +0900, itsme213 <itsme213 / hotmail.com> wrote:
> So would you use "contains" for anything a method might return? Or would you
> limit it to some subset of those things it's slots can get to, directly or
> indirectly? I think I read more into it than you meant.
> 
> Sure, [] (or any accessor) can return any stored or derived value, from
> colletions or otherwise. Some of them may be part of what you choose to
> consider your object state, others not.
> 
> Did that make it any better? Or worse? :-)

Okay, to back this up:

I don't have a problem with YOUR mental model of an object and its
state, although I don't see objects in such an ivory tower way. I
don't, however, see a need to expose such a thing in Ruby. Remember
that Matz makes things that he doesn't want to be easy "ugly."
Iterating on the individual "slots" of an object would not necessarily
be something to be encouraged.

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin / halostatue.ca