Steven Schveighoffer Wrote: > On Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:29:27 -0500, Ali Ãehreli <acehr...@yahoo.com> wrote: [...] > > I must be remembering an old behavior. I think appending could > > affect the original if it had enough capacity.
> Before the array append changes were introduced (somewhere around > 2.040 I think?), appending to a slice that started at the beginning of > the memory block could affect the other data in the array. But that > was a memory corruption issue, somewhat different than what we > are talking about. Ah! This is a lot of what was confusing me about arrays; I still thought they had this behavior. The fact that they don't makes me a good deal more comfortable with them, though I still don't like the non-deterministic way that they may copy their elements or they may share structure after you append stuff to them. Cheers, Pillsy
