>>>snip...
>>>One could just
>>>leave it as it is, because the precondition for answering a "correct"
>>>rectangle is that the receiver and the argument intersect. If they don't, the
>>>answer is undefined, which means that whatever is answered is correct in a
>>>mathematical sense.
>>>snip...
>>
>> I urge some caution here.  If "whatever is answered is correct in a
>> mathematical sense" is true then returning any rectangle like (100 at 100)
>> corner: (150 at 150) would be correct, clearly that is not the case.  In
>> Smalltalk, nil is undefined, nil is probably the "correct" answer.
>
>Yes, this is tempting.
>However from a pragmatic point of view that would mean that:
>- either every call must be protected with an intersects: test or (...
>intersect ...) ifNil: [...]
>- or UndefinedObject must understand Rectangle protocol
>Answering an empty rectangle seems more simple with this respect.
>Nicolas

As I don't play with rectangles much, I will defer to your better judgment.
Mostly I was concerned about the "whatever is answered is correct in a
mathematical sense" statement but maybe I was being too picky.  And why I
quoted "correct" when I said nil was probably the "correct" answer. Correct
or not an empty rectangle is probably the "better" answer.

Lou
-----------------------------------------------------------
Louis LaBrunda
Keystone Software Corp.
SkypeMe callto://PhotonDemon
mailto:Lou at Keystone-Software.com http://www.Keystone-Software.com