On 06.06.2011 10:15, Ilias Lazaridis wrote:
> On 6 Ϧ, 10:14, Robert Klemme<shortcut... / googlemail.com>  wrote:
>> 2011/6/5 Ilias Lazaridis<il... / lazaridis.com>
>>
>>> On 4 , 21:02, Robert Klemme<shortcut... / googlemail.com>  wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> There is another approach which does not suffer from the side effectof
>>> [...]
>>
>>> Note to readers:
>>
>>> This approach is not usable in the given context (Altering Behaviours>>> of "each do").
>>
>>> The code can *possibly* altered, thus it works on Array#each.
>>
>>> For a solution which works exactly in the given context (Array#each),>>> see message from "James Gray" below (you can ignore all following
>>> messages, they are off-topic).
>>
>> If you look close enough you will notice that *both* approaches work
>> (or don't) the same way with regard to #each - for the same reason!
>
> I don't have to "look close enough"

That speaks for itself.

> Your solution does not work in this context.
>
> The solution from Gray works 100%.

Well, yes and no.  From what I read I'd say you are not aware of all the consequences.  The reason is probably that you do not look closer.  It's your choice of course but it makes me feel uncomfortable to see people 
running away with solutions which they do not seem to understand. 
Usually this causes some smaller or larger disaster later on.

Over and out.

	robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/