Realisation: since Ruby Sets are just wrappers around Hashes, and Ruby Hashes are ordered, Sets are ordered in Ruby
-
That’s an implementation detail of Set which shouldn’t be relied upon, of course. (Did you know Set is just a Hash with `true` values?)
-
-
I did wonder
-
Worth noting that Rust doesn't actually pay for any overhead to do that like Ruby does. Compiler will eliminate values since they're 0-size
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.