On Dec 4, 2007 1:04 PM, Bill Kelly <billk / cts.com> wrote:
>
> From: "David A. Black" <dblack / rubypal.com>
> >
> > [...] I just
> > think that Matz's abstraction of these as "dangerous", and dedication
> > of the ! to expressing that abstraction, is strikingly elegant and has
> > the weight of some kind of logic behind it. It hits a narrower target
> > -- it means that there's a whole class of tricky (or whatever) methods
> > that have to find some other way to express their trickiness -- but I
> > think it's worth it.
>
> Ah.  I think I understand your viewpoint better now; thanks.
>
> (And if nothing else, at least we can both agree on the "hits a
> narrower target" part.  <grin> )
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bill
>
>
>
>
>

Well, slice(-1) and slice!(-1) are equivalents for pop (non-modifying)
and pop! (modifying), right?