[#53944] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8210][Open] Multibyte character interfering with end-line character within a regex — "sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)" <sawadatsuyoshi@...>

14 messages 2013/04/03

[#53974] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8215][Open] Support accessing Fiber-locals and backtraces for a Fiber — "halorgium (Tim Carey-Smith)" <ruby-lang-bugs@...>

14 messages 2013/04/03

[#54095] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8237][Open] Logical method chaining via inferred receiver — "wardrop (Tom Wardrop)" <tom@...>

34 messages 2013/04/08

[#54138] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8241][Open] If uri host-part has underscore ( '_' ), 'URI#parse' raise 'URI::InvalidURIError' — "neocoin (Sangmin Ryu)" <neocoin@...>

9 messages 2013/04/09

[#54185] [CommonRuby - Feature #8257][Open] Exception#cause to carry originating exception along with new one — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

43 messages 2013/04/11

[#54196] Encouraging use of CommonRuby — Charles Oliver Nutter <headius@...>

I think we need to do more to encourage the use of the CommonRuby

20 messages 2013/04/11
[#54200] Re: Encouraging use of CommonRuby — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core-mailing-list@...> 2013/04/11

Hi,

[#54211] Re: Encouraging use of CommonRuby — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2013/04/12

As far as I understand, what is CommonRuby and the process over CommonRuby

[#54207] [CommonRuby - Feature #8258][Open] Dir#escape_glob — "steveklabnik (Steve Klabnik)" <steve@...>

15 messages 2013/04/12

[#54218] [CommonRuby - Feature #8259][Open] Atomic attributes accessors — "funny_falcon (Yura Sokolov)" <funny.falcon@...>

43 messages 2013/04/12

[#54288] [CommonRuby - Feature #8271][Open] Proposal for moving to a more visible, formal process for feature requests — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

15 messages 2013/04/15

[#54333] Requesting Commit Access — Aman Gupta <ruby@...1.net>

Hello ruby-core,

16 messages 2013/04/16

[#54473] [Backport 200 - Backport #8299][Open] Minor error in float parsing — "bobjalex (Bob Alexander)" <bobjalex@...>

27 messages 2013/04/19

[#54532] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8315][Open] mkmf does not include include paths from pkg_config anymore — "Hanmac (Hans Mackowiak)" <hanmac@...>

11 messages 2013/04/23

[#54621] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339][Open] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

43 messages 2013/04/27
[#54643] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — "authorNari (Narihiro Nakamura)" <authorNari@...> 2013/04/28

[#54649] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2013/04/28

(2013/04/28 9:23), authorNari (Narihiro Nakamura) wrote:

[#54657] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8339][Open] Introducing Geneartional Garbage Collection for CRuby/MRI — Magnus Holm <judofyr@...> 2013/04/28

On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 8:19 PM, ko1 (Koichi Sasada)

[#54665] [ruby-trunk - Bug #8344][Open] Status of Psych and Syck — "Eregon (Benoit Daloze)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2013/04/28

[ruby-core:54102] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8237] Logical method chaining via inferred receiver

From: Matthew Kerwin <matthew@...>
Date: 2013-04-08 13:07:16 UTC
List: ruby-core #54102
On Apr 8, 2013 10:39 PM, "rosenfeld (Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas)" <
rr.rosas@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I really believe it would be better to isolate each wanted feature in a
separate ticket instead of mixing several ideas in the same ticket. Also, I
guess you should state clearly that a&&.b&&.c should mean (tmp1 = a; tmp1
&& (tmp2 = tmp1.b); tmp2 && tmp2.c), meaning that each method should be
evaluated just once in the chain.
>
> Anyway, I'm -1 for this proposal (with the implementation above) because
it doesn't make any sense to me to call any method on the "false" object in
most real-world codes out there. I'm favorable to adding a shortcut syntax
for chaining methods, but I believe it should check for "nil?" only. I
don't have an opinion yet if it should abort the entire statement if a
subexpression is nil, like CoffeeScript does, or simply replace the
subexpression with "nil" and let the expression go on with the evaluation,
like Groovy does.

I think you've missed the point of this request. There is only one wanted
feature, and it has nothing to do with "checking for nil", except that it
can be used to simplify a common pattern already employed for that purpose.

Note that this one also theoretically allows such constructs as:

    foo[bar] || .inspect
    baz if .empty?

or

    "41" << .to_i(16).chr  #=> "41A"

Strange examples, but possible nonetheless.

In This Thread