On Friday 23 January 2004 06:43 pm, Gennady wrote:
> Patrick Bennett wrote:
> > Hmmm, thanks, but it's a bit 'non-obvious' to casual Ruby programmers
> > (who will have to understand my code).  'to_a' is pretty darn clear.  :(
> > Matz, somebody?  Why is to_a being obsoleted?  :(
>
> I would not call "to_a" very obvious, as compared to, say, "to_array"
> (if one existed). "[ *o ]" is more obvious in a sense that it is
> comprised of two constructs one MUST know to read any Ruby program: "[]"
> makes an array and "*" expands an object in-place.

I hadn't heard of this deprecation. Waht is the reasoning? If x.to_a is going 
away, to be exchanged for the use of [*x], will to_h also follow and be 
replaced by [**x]?

T.