"Miko O'Sullivan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Dave Whipp wrote: > > > Only if we apply a bit of magic (2 is a true value). The rule might be: > > How about if we just have two different methods: one for boolean and one > for multiple divvies: > > my(@true, @false) := @array.cull{/some test/}; > > my (@a, @b, @c) := @array.divvy{some code}
I think you are correct, but only because of the psychology of affordances: you wrote "@true, @false", not "@false, @true". I use the same mental ordering, so I expect it would be a common bug. I think that c<cull> would be an abysmal name: that implies "keep the false ones". I'm not sure that there is a synonym for "boolean partition" though. Perhaps we need some help from a linguist! ;) Dave.