From: Magnus Holm <judofyr@...>
Date: 2013-05-14T04:01:38+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:54970] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #8377] Deprecate :: for method calls in 2.1

--001a11c3fd124b395504dc9e25d6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 7:11 PM, jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) <
merch-redmine@jeremyevans.net> wrote:

>
> Issue #8377 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).
>
>
> jballanc (Joshua Ballanco) wrote:
> > If we remove the ability to call methods with (({::})), then the class
> definition lines don't match as nicely:
> >
> >     class Baz < Foo::Bar
> >     ...
> >     class Quux < Foo.Bar("Howdy")
> >     ...
> >
> > Though I'd be interested to hear Mr. Evans opinion, since I think Sequel
> is where I've seen this used to the greatest effect...
>
> I'm against removing it, since I think there are places where the syntax
> looks nicer with :: (constructors such as Sequel::Model() and
> Nokogiri::XML()).  Having only one way to do something for its own sake is
> not the ruby way, and I think the loss of backwards compatibility and nicer
> syntax outweighs the reduced confusion.  I don't train new ruby
> programmers, though, so maybe I underestimate the confusion this causes.


Can't you use use #[] for this?

  class Quuz < Foo::Bar["Howdy"]
  end

  class User < Sequel::Model[:User]
  end

  doc = Nokogiri::XML[data]

--001a11c3fd124b395504dc9e25d6
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 7:11 PM, jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evan=
s) <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:merch-redmine@jeremyevans.net" t=
arget=3D"_blank">merch-redmine@jeremyevans.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><di=
v class=3D"gmail_extra">

<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><br>
Issue #8377 has been updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans).<br>
<div class=3D"im"><br>
<br>
jballanc (Joshua Ballanco) wrote:<br>
&gt; If we remove the ability to call methods with (({::})), then the class=
 definition lines don&#39;t match as nicely:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 class Baz &lt; Foo::Bar<br>
&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ...<br>
&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 class Quux &lt; Foo.Bar(&quot;Howdy&quot;)<br>
&gt; =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ...<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Though I&#39;d be interested to hear Mr. Evans opinion, since I think =
Sequel is where I&#39;ve seen this used to the greatest effect...<br>
<br>
</div>I&#39;m against removing it, since I think there are places where the=
 syntax looks nicer with :: (constructors such as Sequel::Model() and Nokog=
iri::XML()). =C2=A0Having only one way to do something for its own sake is =
not the ruby way, and I think the loss of backwards compatibility and nicer=
 syntax outweighs the reduced confusion. =C2=A0I don&#39;t train new ruby p=
rogrammers, though, so maybe I underestimate the confusion this causes.</bl=
ockquote>

<div><br></div><div style>Can&#39;t you use use #[] for this?</div><div sty=
le><br></div><div style>=C2=A0 class Quuz &lt; Foo::Bar[&quot;Howdy&quot;]<=
/div><div style>=C2=A0 end</div><div style><br></div><div style>=C2=A0 clas=
s User &lt; Sequel::Model[:User]</div>

<div style>=C2=A0 end</div><div style><br></div><div style>=C2=A0 doc =3D N=
okogiri::XML[data]=C2=A0</div></div></div></div>

--001a11c3fd124b395504dc9e25d6--