From: "Martin J. Dürst" <duerst@...>
Date: 2013-04-03T10:39:56+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:53921] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8191] Short-hand syntax for duck-typing

On 2013/04/03 9:54, wardrop (Tom Wardrop) wrote:
>
> Issue #8191 has been updated by wardrop (Tom Wardrop).

> @davidderyldowney, ideally, a single question mark would probably make that clearer, but alas, a single question mark serves another purpose. The question mark prefix is always an option though as well, e.g.

How does this work with methods that already have a ? at the end? Will 
we get something like include???, or what?


> Even that syntax isn't a perfect match, as if for example the (({user})) method is process-heavy, calling it 4 times is going to be slow.

Slow is still not the worst. If one of these methods has side effects, 
that would be even worse.

I think this kind of pattern appears once in a while, but I think we 
should be careful about introducing shortcuts like these (and wrongly 
calling them duck-typing), because there may often be a better way to 
organize the code (and use real duck-typing).

Regards,   Martin.