From: "bughit (bug hit) via ruby-core" Date: 2023-05-16T19:02:51+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:113499] [Ruby master Feature#12165] Hash#first, Hash#last Issue #12165 has been updated by bughit (bug hit). @nobu Since you commented recently, what do you think about about a performant Hash#last(n=1) and a related performant Hash#reverse_each ? Should any ordered collection have those? ---------------------------------------- Feature #12165: Hash#first, Hash#last https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12165#change-103094 * Author: stillhart (Fabian Stillhart) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- Just run into a simple problem with a colleague and was wondering why there is no Hash#last method? ~~~ruby {a: true, b: false}.last NoMethodError: undefined method 'last' for {:a=>true, :b=>false}:Hash ~~~ Interestingly I while playing arround I found out that the Hash#first method works. But why is it not in the ruby-doc? ~~~ruby {a: true, b: false}.first => [:a, true] ~~~ I would assume the Hash#last method would work like the Hash#first method: ~~~ruby {a: true, b: false}.last => [:b, false] ~~~ If I am not wrong the order of a Hash is always the same when calling Hash#each. So wouldn't it make sense to have Hash#last method? I tested it in Ruby 2.2.4 and Ruby 2.3.0. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ ______________________________________________ ruby-core mailing list -- ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-core-leave@ml.ruby-lang.org ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/