Set.add should return a bool to indicate if the value already existed

[peter-ahe-google]

Similarly to Set.remove, Set.add should return a bool so one can avoid doing:

if (mySet.contains(o)) { throw 'not unique'; }
mySet.add(o);

And instead do:

if (!mySet.add(o)) { throw 'not unique'; }

[lrhn]

I agree. The Set.add method should not overwrite an existing equal value in the set, and should return true if it actually added an element to the set, and it should be documented as such.

---

Set owner to @lrhn.
Added Accepted label.

[dgrove]

Issue #4210 has been merged into this issue.

[DartBot]

This comment was originally written by domi...@google.com

---

http://codereview.chromium.org/10836009/

---

Set owner to domi...@google.com.
Added Started label.

[lrhn]

Issue #6548 has been merged into this issue.

[lrhn]

Removed Type-Defect label.
Added Type-Enhancement label.

[kevmoo]

Another attempt: https://codereview.chromium.org/26280002/

---

Set owner to @kevmoo.

[kevmoo]

r28863

---

Added Fixed label.

[nicolasgarnier]

Set owner to @kevmoo.