[#27003] [Bug #2422] splat operator fails on array of 1 element — Raul Parolari <redmine@...>

Bug #2422: splat operator fails on array of 1 element

12 messages 2009/12/02

[#27025] [Backport #2431] StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n" — Hiroshi NAKAMURA <redmine@...>

Backport #2431: StringIO#{gets,readlines} with "" (paragraph mode) trims last "\n"

8 messages 2009/12/04

[#27086] [Feature #2454] OpenSSL has no maintainer — Yui NARUSE <redmine@...>

Feature #2454: OpenSSL has no maintainer

16 messages 2009/12/07

[#27120] #to_enum ignores block? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Is #to_enum ignoring its block expected?

11 messages 2009/12/09

[#27135] better GC? — Roger Pack <rogerdpack@...>

Could I put in a small plea for a better GC?

56 messages 2009/12/10
[#27136] Re: better GC? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2009/12/11

Hi,

[#27476] Re: better GC? — Paul Brannan <pbrannan@...> 2010/01/07

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 09:07:16AM +0900, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#27477] Re: better GC? — Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...> 2010/01/07

Excerpts from Paul Brannan's message of Thu Jan 07 21:53:34 +0200 2010:

[#27563] Re: better GC? — Brent Roman <brent@...> 2010/01/12

[#27199] [Backport #2488] thread usage can result in bad HANDLE — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Backport #2488: thread usage can result in bad HANDLE

12 messages 2009/12/16

[#27286] [Bug #2515] Array#select! — Roger Pack <redmine@...>

Bug #2515: Array#select!

17 messages 2009/12/22

[#27327] [Bug #2531] Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version — Luis Lavena <redmine@...>

Bug #2531: Ruby 1.8.7-p248 fails to cross-compile same version

9 messages 2009/12/25

[#27360] [Feature #2542] URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886 — Marc-Andre Lafortune <redmine@...>

Feature #2542: URI lib should be updated to RFC 39886

15 messages 2009/12/31

[ruby-core:27321] Re: select!

From: Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Date: 2009-12-25 06:20:26 UTC
List: ruby-core #27321
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wro=
te:

>> As a datum: I've frequently typed select! in the past, expecting it to
>> be there, so it _is_ useful to me. =A0(I then add it myself, of course,
>> but curse having to do so.)
>
> I still don't think the concept makes sense. Sure, you seem to want to us=
e it, but in the same vain do you also reach for delete_if's opposite?
>
> =A0ary.delete_unless { ... }

No, but how it that in the same vein?  I don't use delete_if (I much
prefer the method name 'reject') and I wouldn't use delete_unless
either, whereas I like, understand and have frequently used select!.

I guess what I'm saying is this: I don't think of select! in terms of
opposites (as in "I use reject! so I'll also use select!").  It's just
as in-place version of "select", as the name implies.

I don't want to labour the point, but this is my typical use case:

Code starts out as something like

  result =3D collection.map { |x| ... }.select { |x| ... }

But then I might add code to the "map" part, and the code now extends
over a few lines and looks poor if it's chained together.  So it gets
changed to:

  result =3D collection.map { |x|
    ...
    ...
    ...
  }
  result.select! { |x| ... }

--
Gavin Sinclair

In This Thread