[#119132] Segfault using ruby C on MacOS (Intel Catalina and M2 Sonoma) — "martin.kufner--- via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Hey guys,
4 messages
2024/09/12
[#119133] Re: Segfault using ruby C on MacOS (Intel Catalina and M2 Sonoma)
— "martin.kufner--- via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
2024/09/12
I just saw, that the #includes dont show up in the c file ...
[#119145] [Ruby master Misc#20728] Propose Eileen Uchitelle as a core committer — "kddnewton (Kevin Newton) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Issue #20728 has been reported by kddnewton (Kevin Newton).
14 messages
2024/09/12
[#119312] [Ruby master Bug#20762] `make test-basic` with -DRGENGC_FORCE_MAJOR_GC is always failure — "hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Issue #20762 has been reported by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA).
6 messages
2024/09/27
[ruby-core:119367] [Ruby master Feature#20770] A *new* pipe operator proposal
From:
"ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date:
2024-09-30 22:15:49 UTC
List:
ruby-core #119367
Issue #20770 has been updated by ufuk (Ufuk Kayserilioglu).
AlexandreMagro (Alexandre Magro) wrote in #note-7:
> With the pipe operator, the same logic can be simplified and made more readable:
>
> ```
> client_api_url
> |> URI.parse(it)
> |> Net::HTTP.get(it)
> |> JSON.parse(it).fetch(important_key)
> ```
I would like to note that this almost works already today:
```ruby
irb> client_api_url = "https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/1"
#=> "https://jsonplaceholder.typicode.com/posts/1"
irb> pipeline = URI.method(:parse) >> Net::HTTP.method(:get) >> JSON.method(:parse)
#=> #<Proc:0x000000012c62b4e8 (lambda)>
irb> pipeline.call(client_api_url)
#=>
{"userId"=>1,
"id"=>1,
"title"=>"sunt aut facere repellat provident occaecati excepturi optio reprehenderit",
"body"=>
"quia et suscipit\nsuscipit recusandae consequuntur expedita et cum\nreprehenderit molestiae ut ut quas totam\nnostrum rerum est autem sunt rem eveniet architecto"}
irb> pipeline = URI.method(:parse) >> Net::HTTP.method(:get) >> JSON.method(:parse) >> -> { it.fetch("title") }
#=> #<Proc:0x000000012c4c2778 (lambda)>
irb> pipeline.call(client_api_url)
#=> "sunt aut facere repellat provident occaecati excepturi optio reprehenderit"
```
You can also make the whole pipeline with just using procs:
```ruby
(-> { URI.parse(it) } >> -> { Net::HTTP.get(it) } >> -> { JSON.parse(it) } >> -> { it.fetch("title") }).call(client_api_url)
#=> "sunt aut facere repellat provident occaecati excepturi optio reprehenderit"
```
which is much closer to the syntax that you want, except for the lambda wrappers.
I think with `Proc#>>` and `Proc#<<` this need for chaining is mostly in place already. The thing that is really missing is the ability to access a method by name without having to do `.method(:name)` which was proposed in https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16264. That proposal would make the first example be:
```ruby
(URI.:parse >> Net::HTTP.:get >> JSON.:parse >> -> { it.fetch("title") }).call(client_api_url)
#=> "sunt aut facere repellat provident occaecati excepturi optio reprehenderit"
```
which looks much nicer.
----------------------------------------
Feature #20770: A *new* pipe operator proposal
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20770#change-109980
* Author: AlexandreMagro (Alexandre Magro)
* Status: Open
----------------------------------------
Hello,
This is my first contribution here. I have seen previous discussions around introducing a pipe operator, but it seems the community didn't reach a consensus. I would like to revisit this idea with a simpler approach, more of a syntactic sugar that aligns with how other languages implement the pipe operator, but without making significant changes to Ruby's syntax.
Currently, we often write code like this:
```ruby
value = half(square(add(value, 3)))
```
We can achieve the same result using the `then` method:
```ruby
value = value.then { add(_1, 3) }.then { square(_1) }.then { half(_1) }
```
While `then` helps with readability, we can simplify it further using the proposed pipe operator:
```ruby
value = add(value, 3) |> square(_1) |> half(_1)
```
Moreover, with the upcoming `it` feature in Ruby 3.4 (#18980), the code could look even cleaner:
```ruby
value = add(value, 3) |> square(it) |> half(it)
```
This proposal uses the anonymous block argument `(_1)`, and with `it`, it simplifies the code without introducing complex syntax changes. It would allow us to achieve the same results as in other languages that support pipe operators, but in a way that feels natural to Ruby, using existing constructs like `then` underneath.
I believe this operator would enhance code readability and maintainability, especially in cases where multiple operations are chained together.
Thank you for considering this proposal!
--
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/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/