[ruby-core:43725] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5364] How about new syntax: "object.\method" returns a Method instance?

Issue #5364 has been updated by trans (Thomas Sawyer).


Personally I think it's a ugly notation. Also methods aren't 1st class --you don't get the same method object each time. If we did, then I say it agree it would be important to have a concise syntax.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5364: How about new syntax: "object.\method" returns a Method instance?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5364#change-25227

Author: yimutang (Joey Zhou)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: 


I'm afraid the normal way of creating a Method instance is circuitous and a bit hard to write:

    a_method = object.method(:method_name)

I find the way of obtaining a function/method object in Python is so easy, for example, "str.split()" returns a list, while "str.split" (without parentheses) returns a method object. However, parenthesis in Ruby is always optional, so this road is blocked.

Well, how about "object.\method" style? You can type "str.\split" to get "str.method(:split)".

The reasons are:

1. It makes people happy, writing less code, and no harm to readability.

2. "\" is not a frequently used token. It can only be used in strings, regexps (or any else?). I think using this token leads to no ambiguity.

3. "\" is like Perl's referrence symbol. In Perl, you can use "$f = \&func;" to make a referrence to the function. In Ruby, "&" seems unnecessary.

4. It enhances the consistency of the language syntax. There are two correlative methods "Object#send" and "Object#method", but...

    str.send(:split)       == str.split
    str.method(:split)   == ???????

If adding this new syntax, it looks more pretty:
  
    str.method(:split)   == str.\split



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