Ara.T.Howard wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Robert Klemme wrote:
>
>> Why not directly use the block?  I think it's a tad more efficient:
> <snip>
>> def of(&b) (0...self).map(&b) end
>>
>> But what do you need that for?  I couldn't find it...
>>
>
> yeah - remnants of partial solution on both counts.  should've
> cleaned it up a bit more first ;-)

Ah, I see.  Suspected already that you were storing the block for later
(re)use...

> the 'of' method is one of my favouraites - i think i have an RCR out
> there for it...

Ah, then this was a case of surreptitious advertising. :-)  Hmmm, can't
seem to find it here
http://rcrchive.net/user/activity/126  What's the idea behind it?

Kind regards

    robert