[#120465] [Ruby master Bug#20998] rb_str_locktmp() changes flags of frozen strings and string literals — "Eregon (Benoit Daloze) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Issue #20998 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
17 messages
2025/01/03
[ruby-core:120563] [Ruby master Feature#20925] Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line
From:
"nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date:
2025-01-09 06:48:43 UTC
List:
ruby-core #120563
Issue #20925 has been updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada). Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) wrote in #note-8: > a = b > && c > should be parsed as > > a = (b > && c) > correct? That would not change the RHS of assignment. Currently the first line in the former is complete code. I mean that the second line will change the RHS to `b && c`. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20925: Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20925#change-111384 * Author: Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I would like for this to become accepted syntax: condition1 || condition2 condition1 && condition2 condition1 or condition2 condition1 and condition2 This is similar to how method chaining on the second line was added in Ruby 1.9 expr .method And it has the same advantage: when you have a multi-line expression, instead of hunting for the dot or boolean operator at the end of line1, it's right there at the beginning of line2, making the structure very obvious and readable. Please contrast: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption The first expression must rely on indentation to communicate the multi-line nature of the condition, and even then it's not as immediately obvious as the second expression, where we can see easily and immediately that this is a multi-line `&&` condition. This syntax is also similar to how a trailing comma is allowed in arrays and hashes (and method calls since Ruby 1.9), with the same advantage. It makes for a cleaner diff when you add an element to the array/hash/conditional. Taking the previous example, imagine we are adding the condition `&& request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption`. Now contrast the diff between the two styles: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && - request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && + request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption Based on the above I would say this syntax is natural and consistent with existing Ruby syntactical elements, and would greatly improve code readability. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ ______________________________________________ ruby-core mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/