Range>>at: patch

[Ken Causey]

Actually that first issue is with Range>>includes: so this is actually a
patch for both methods.

> 1.  It was not checking the indices correctly and was needlessly using
> the step twice.  Lee caught this before me.

Sorry for the confusion,

Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : /archives/slate/attachments/20040803/164b67c9/attachment.pgp