> Yes, quite right. A linked list is also an
> ordered collection of items. Yet we wouldn't
> say that a string "is a" linked list.
> 
> Hal Fulton

not to be mean, but this is just the worst logic:

"Yes, quite right. A *cat* is also an *animal*.
 Yet we wouldn't say that a *parrot* "is a" *cat*."

no one has said anything to the effect that a string is a linked list.

~transami


On Sun, 2002-07-07 at 12:39, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Michael Campbell" <michael_s_campbell / yahoo.com>
> To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 06, 2002 11:21 PM
> Subject: Re: is there a better string.each?
> 
> 
> > Someone else mentioned earlier what's been bugging me about this;
> > although you may like to think of strings as arrays, the array bit is
> > just an implementation choice.  The thing is not necessarily its
> > implementation.
> 
> Yes, quite right. A linked list is also an
> ordered collection of items. Yet we wouldn't
> say that a string "is a" linked list.
> 
> Hal Fulton
> 
> 
> 
-- 
~transami

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
 temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
	-- Benjamin Franklin