On 2/19/07, dblack / wobblini.net <dblack / wobblini.net> wrote:
> Hi --
>
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, Robert Dober wrote:
>
> >> > I do not like the lack of symmetry it just feels not right.
> >>
> >> You should adopt my Ruby slogan:
> >>
> >>    Ruby: the triumph of balance over symmetry.
> >>
> >> :-)
> > It's easy when you are with the majority, do you remember the thread
> > about "receiver" though ;) [ I still think you are right about that
> > one]
> > I kind of hope to be right with this one, but I am checking the thread
> > now.
>
> One example is:
>
>    "09".succ # => "10"
>    "9".succ  # => "10"
I thought it was "a" :(
>
>    "10".pred # => ??
It would have been "09"
This is bad and there is no solution, good point again.
I guess I will deprecate String#succ in my programs
Thx for explaining it to me.
>
> Since it's not a one-to-one mapping, the only way to go backwards is
> to come up with arbitrary rules.  That doesn't mean it's a bad idea,
> but there's definitely no single clear way for it to work.
>
>
> David
>
> --
> Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers?
> A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black)
>     (See what readers are saying!  http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf)
> Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching?
> A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)
>
>
Robert

-- 
We have not succeeded in answering all of our questions.
In fact, in some ways, we are more confused than ever.
But we feel we are confused on a higher level and about more important things.
-Anonymous