[#44036] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6242][Open] Ruby should support lists — "shugo (Shugo Maeda)" <redmine@...>

20 messages 2012/04/01

[#44084] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6246][Open] 1.9.3-p125 intermittent segfault — "jshow (Jodi Showers)" <jodi@...>

22 messages 2012/04/02

[#44156] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6265][Open] Remove 'useless' 'concatenation' syntax — "rosenfeld (Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas)" <rr.rosas@...>

45 messages 2012/04/06

[#44163] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6266][Open] encoding related exception with recent integrated psych — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>

10 messages 2012/04/06

[#44303] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6284][Open] Add composition for procs — "pabloh (Pablo Herrero)" <pablodherrero@...>

57 messages 2012/04/12

[#44349] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6293][Open] new queue / blocking queues — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>

10 messages 2012/04/13

[#44402] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6308][Open] Eliminate delegation from WeakRef — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

20 messages 2012/04/17

[#44403] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6309][Open] Add a reference queue for weak references — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

15 messages 2012/04/17

[#44533] [ruby-trunk - Bug #6341][Open] SIGSEGV: Thread.new { fork { GC.start } }.join — "rudolf (r stu3)" <redmine@...>

24 messages 2012/04/22

[#44630] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6361][Open] Bitwise string operations — "MartinBosslet (Martin Bosslet)" <Martin.Bosslet@...>

31 messages 2012/04/26

[#44648] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6367][Open] #same? for Enumerable — "prijutme4ty (Ilya Vorontsov)" <prijutme4ty@...>

16 messages 2012/04/26

[#44704] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6373][Open] public #self — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

61 messages 2012/04/27

[#44748] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6376][Open] Feature lookup and checking if feature is loaded — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

13 messages 2012/04/28

[ruby-core:44374] [ruby-trunk - Feature #6298][Rejected] Proc#+

From: "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>
Date: 2012-04-16 03:37:09 UTC
List: ruby-core #44374
Issue #6298 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh).

Status changed from Open to Rejected

Hello,

I think you have valid concern.  AFAIK, there is no way to do this.
But #5007 (Proc#call_under) is apparently a more general solution
for this issue.
You will be able to write BlockCollection with Proc#call_under:

  def to_proc
    Proc.new{ |*a| procs.each{ |p| p.call_under(self, *a) } }
  end

So, let's discuss the feature in that thread.

-- 
Yusuke Endoh <mame@tsg.ne.jp>

----------------------------------------
Feature #6298: Proc#+
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6298#change-25920

Author: trans (Thomas Sawyer)
Status: Rejected
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: core
Target version: 


=begin
Maybe there is another way to do this, and if so please enlighten me.

I have a case where collection of blocks need to be handled as if a single block, e.g.

  class BlockCollection
    def initialize(*procs)
      @procs = procs
    end
    def to_proc
      procs = @procs
      Proc.new{ |*a| procs.each{ |p| p.call(*a) } }
    end
  end

The issue with this is with #to_proc. It's not going to do the right thing if a BlockCollection instance is passed to #instance_eval b/c it would not actually be evaluating each internal block via #instance_eval.

But if we change it to:

    def to_proc
      Proc.new{ |*a| procs.each{ |p| instance_exec(*a, &p) } }
    end

It would do the right thing with #instance_eval, but it would no longer do the right thing for #call, b/c would it evaluate in the context of BlockCollection instance instead of where the blocks weer defined.

So, unless there is some way to do this that I do not see, to handle this Ruby would have to provide some means for it. To this end Proc#+ is a possible candidate which could truly combine two procs into one.
=end



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

In This Thread

Prev Next