Todd Benson wrote:
> I'm still trying to figure out why you would want a Range object --
> which, by usual definition -- is a _not_ open-ended, have an infinite
> side.
I can't help but think of lazily evaluated lists here, mainly because 
I've got Haskell on the brain at the moment.  Infinite lists crop up all 
over the place on that side of the fence.  The point is that you can 
loop over as many elements as you need to, without needing to know how 
far down the list you're going to go before you start.  Off the top of 
my head I can't think of an instance where this approach would be better 
than any other in Ruby, or why you might need to pass around a 
definition of that list as a discrete object, but I haven't thought very 
hard about it :-)

-- 
Alex