[#107430] [Ruby master Feature#18566] Merge `io-wait` gem into core IO — "byroot (Jean Boussier)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18566 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier).

22 messages 2022/02/02

[#107434] [Ruby master Bug#18567] Depending on default gems when not needed considered harmful — "Eregon (Benoit Daloze)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18567 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).

31 messages 2022/02/02

[#107443] [Ruby master Feature#18568] Explore lazy RubyGems boot to reduce need for --disable-gems — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18568 has been reported by headius (Charles Nutter).

13 messages 2022/02/02

[#107481] [Ruby master Feature#18571] Removed the bundled sources from release package after Ruby 3.2 — "hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18571 has been reported by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA).

9 messages 2022/02/04

[#107490] [Ruby master Bug#18572] Performance regression when invoking refined methods — "palkan (Vladimir Dementyev)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18572 has been reported by palkan (Vladimir Dementyev).

12 messages 2022/02/05

[#107514] [Ruby master Feature#18576] Rename `ASCII-8BIT` encoding to `BINARY` — "byroot (Jean Boussier)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18576 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier).

47 messages 2022/02/08

[#107536] [Ruby master Feature#18579] Concatenation of ASCII-8BIT strings shouldn't behave differently depending on string contents — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18579 has been reported by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson).

11 messages 2022/02/09

[#107547] [Ruby master Bug#18580] Range#include? inconsistency for String ranges — "zverok (Victor Shepelev)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18580 has been reported by zverok (Victor Shepelev).

10 messages 2022/02/10

[#107603] [Ruby master Feature#18589] Finer-grained constant invalidation — "kddeisz (Kevin Newton)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18589 has been reported by kddeisz (Kevin Newton).

17 messages 2022/02/16

[#107624] [Ruby master Bug#18590] String#downcase and CAPITAL LETTER I WITH DOT ABOVE — "andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18590 has been reported by andrykonchin (Andrew Konchin).

13 messages 2022/02/17

[#107651] [Ruby master Misc#18591] DevMeeting-2022-03-17 — "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18591 has been reported by mame (Yusuke Endoh).

11 messages 2022/02/18

[#107682] [Ruby master Feature#18595] Alias `String#-@` as `String#dedup` — "byroot (Jean Boussier)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18595 has been reported by byroot (Jean Boussier).

15 messages 2022/02/21

[#107699] [Ruby master Feature#18597] Strings need a named method like `dup` that doesn't duplicate if receiver is mutable — "danh337 (Dan H)" <noreply@...>

Issue #18597 has been reported by danh337 (Dan H).

18 messages 2022/02/21

[ruby-core:107754] [Ruby master Feature#18603] Allow syntax like obj.method(arg)=value

From: "sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)" <noreply@...>
Date: 2022-02-27 08:03:23 UTC
List: ruby-core #107754
Issue #18603 has been updated by sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada).


Notice that, while `[]` in `[]=` cannot be omitted, `()` in method invocation can be omitted. Are you expecting `()` in the proposed feature to be omittable or not? Either way, I think it would introduce complexity. I think that is a crucial difference between `[]=` and the proposed feature; the latter is not as simple as the former.

----------------------------------------
Feature #18603: Allow syntax like obj.method(arg)=value
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18603#change-96679

* Author: hmdne (hmdne -)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
I propose here to allow a syntax like:

```ruby
obj.method(arg) = value
```

It would be translated to the following:

```ruby
obj.__send__(:method=, arg, value)
```

The lack of this syntax kind of limits the ability to design DSLs in Ruby in my opinion. I don't think this would bring any conflicts with existing parser rules.

My proposal would be to put the value at the last argument, akin to how `[]=` works. So, for example this code would work:

```ruby
module Indexable
  def dig=(*path, last, value)
    if path.empty?
      self[last] = value
    else
      first = path.shift
      self[first]&.dig(*path, last) = value
    end
  end
end

Hash.include Indexable
Array.include Indexable
```

The kwargs may be supported similarly to how they work on `[]=`, ie. becoming a penultimate Hash argument. While maybe not perfect, it is consistent with how `[]=` works and I imagine most usecases won't require kwargs.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>

In This Thread