Hi,

In message "Re: Hash#update"
    on 02/12/23, Austin Ziegler <austin / halostatue.ca> writes:

|> No information lost by String#+ or Array#+, but Hash#update may
|> lose the value. That's why I rejected the name "+". It is possible
|> to provide the non destructive "update" under different name. Good
|> name?
|
|Hash#union, also Hash#| (not Hash#^).

Is it OK for you to lose values by the "union" method?  Not for me.

							matz.