On Sun, 2002-08-04 at 07:38, David Alan Black wrote:
> It's an interesting thing to think about, in part because it raises
> the question of what "everything" is.  For example, an array is an
> ordered list of elements, where each element can be of any type.  So
> -- should there be an ArrayElement type?  I tend to think of "hash
> pair" as sort of like "array element" -- I don't mean I think of them
> as the same construct, but rather that, in both cases, I take the
> object-hood of the underlying elements to be sufficient (in terms of
> "everything is an object"), together with the object-hood of the
> containers themselves.

i think i understand what your getting at.

but on particulars, there is such a thing as ArrayElement. it is called
Object. for an array's elements are objects (100% O), while a hashes are
not. rather they are some sort of syntatical-construct-of-association
between two objects (nil-O)

boy i'm in a strnge mood this morning :-)

- 
~transami