Chad Perrin wrote in post #996688:
> On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 06:21:00AM +0900, Christopher Dicely wrote:
>> > indicate a desire for the data to change in the original data structure?
>>
>> No, I'm claiming that the original requester's statement didn't
>> indicate a need to protect against changes resulting from calling
>> mutating methods on the keys or values of the hashes, only protection
>> from changes resulting from mutations on the hash.
>
> He didn't specify "only protection from changes resulting from mutations
> on the hash."  He said he didn't want his actions to change his data
> structure, in a very general way.
>

So you think the folowing statement is a general, mamby-pamby statement:

>> What I want to do...is work on a *copy* of
>> each element of b,

In my opinion, you need to ask yourself two questions with regards to 
that statement:

1)  What are the elements of b?

2)  Given the op's code example showing what each element of b looks 
like, does copying such an element require a deep copy or a shallow 
copy?

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.