[#100689] [Ruby master Feature#17303] Make webrick to bundled gems or remove from stdlib — hsbt@...
Issue #17303 has been reported by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA).
11 messages
2020/11/02
[#100852] [Ruby master Feature#17326] Add Kernel#must! to the standard library — zimmerman.jake@...
Issue #17326 has been reported by jez (Jake Zimmerman).
24 messages
2020/11/14
[#100930] [Ruby master Feature#17333] Enumerable#many? — masafumi.o1988@...
Issue #17333 has been reported by okuramasafumi (Masafumi OKURA).
10 messages
2020/11/18
[#101071] [Ruby master Feature#17342] Hash#fetch_set — hunter_spawn@...
Issue #17342 has been reported by MaxLap (Maxime Lapointe).
26 messages
2020/11/25
[ruby-core:100990] [Ruby master Feature#17336] using refined: do ... end
From:
eregontp@...
Date:
2020-11-20 19:13:33 UTC
List:
ruby-core #100990
Issue #17336 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun) wrote in #note-7:
> It might be helpful anyway, but a part of the ticket's motivation was to eliminate the deep indentation.
Is it annoying in practice?
It kind of seems nice to have the outer `using do ... end` which is saying "below are local monkey patches for this file".
Instead of having to check if there are further `using refined: Array/refining` calls one after another.
And if those refinements are not trivial and the implementation needs quite some indentation, maybe the refinements should be defined in their own file under some module, that also solves the indentation.
I guess an example of real code where the deep indentation is problematic might help to convince me and maybe others.
----------------------------------------
Feature #17336: using refined: do ... end
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17336#change-88656
* Author: k0kubun (Takashi Kokubun)
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
## Problem
When we need a monkey patch which is used only in a single file, we'd like to define a refinement and use it in the same place. The problem is that it needs deep indentation and `Module.new { ... }` which feels redundant.
```rb
class Foo
using Module.new {
refine Array do
def flat_map!(&block)
replace(flat_map(&block))
end
end
}
# ...
end
```
@tagomoris proposed an idea to reduce indentation and remove `Module.new { ... }`. This looks pretty convenient, but I want to write `do ... end`, which would make it a block of `using` here, because we almost always use `... end` for defining methods or modules.
```rb
module Kernel
def refined(mod, &block)
Module.new do
refine(mod, &block)
end
end
end
class Foo
using refined(Array) {
def flat_map!(&block)
replace(flat_map(&block))
end
}
# ...
end
```
## Proposal
How about supporting this? Because `using` currently doesn't take a block, it doesn't conflict with the existing syntax.
```rb
class Foo
using refined: Array do
def flat_map!(&block)
replace(flat_map(&block))
end
end
# ...
end
```
This syntax is based on ideas of @tagomoris and @znz .
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>