Hi --

On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, Rob Rypka wrote:

> By your logic, reject! is also wrong.  johnny.reject! should reject
> the items, and then give them to you, which is the same as your
> select!.  That's not what it does, though...

See my previous post -- it shows the difference (between reject! and
my sense of select!), which is in the return values.

> In all honesty, I don't care what it's called, but reject! feels like
> it should have an opposite.

Similarly (in case it's unclear), I have no underlying objection to
the idea of a reject! opposite :-)


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack / wobblini.net