Martin DeMello wrote:
> 
> Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> > Not for me.  I probably have to answer to the question "why top is
> > last?" thousand times in the future.  ;-)
> 
> I just realised that the whole reason I wanted this was that it doesn't
> mater which end it is :) It's just "the same end as push and pop".

Then you really don't want 'top', you want 'peek', as in "get value pop
would return, but don't pop it off". 

<digression>
Having too many free braincycles doing the dishes, I started wondering
why the blazes what is the top or bottom of a stack should have anything
to do with anything. I can put the next clean plate on top the other
clean ones, but that doesn't look like a push to me. Now, when I get the
(crazy) idea of putting them at the _bottom_ of the stack of plates, to
be sure to rotate and distribute the wear and tear on the plates, that,
by any definition, is one big push. Just ask my weak, geeky arms. 
</digression>

-- 
(\[ Kent Dahl ]/)_    _~_    __[ http://www.stud.ntnu.no/~kentda/ ]___/~
 ))\_student_/((  \__d L b__/  NTNU - graduate engineering - 5. year  )
( \__\_/__/ ) _)Industrial economics and technological management(
 \____/_\____/ (____engineering.discipline_=_Computer::Technology___)