[#59462] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9342][Open] [PATCH] SizedQueue#clear does not notify waiting threads in Ruby 1.9.3 — "jsc (Justin Collins)" <redmine@...>

9 messages 2014/01/02

[#59466] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9343][Open] [PATCH] SizedQueue#max= wakes up waiters properly — "normalperson (Eric Wong)" <normalperson@...>

11 messages 2014/01/02

[#59498] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9352][Open] [BUG] rb_sys_fail_str(connect(2) for [fe80::1%lo0]:3000) - errno == 0 — "kain (Claudio Poli)" <claudio@...>

10 messages 2014/01/03

[#59516] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9356][Open] TCPSocket.new does not seem to handle INTR — "charliesome (Charlie Somerville)" <charliesome@...>

48 messages 2014/01/03

[#59538] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — "shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe)" <shyouhei@...>

33 messages 2014/01/03
[#59541] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — Eric Wong <normalperson@...> 2014/01/04

Hi, I noticed a trivial typo in array.c, and it fails building struct.c

[#59582] Re: [ruby-trunk - Feature #9362][Assigned] Minimize cache misshit to gain optimal speed — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...> 2014/01/06

Intersting challenge.

[#59583] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9367][Open] REXML::XmlDecl doesn't use user specified quotes — "bearmini (Takashi Oguma)" <bear.mini@...>

12 messages 2014/01/06

[#59642] [ruby-trunk - Bug #9384][Open] Segfault in ruby 2.1.0p0 — "cbliard (Christophe Bliard)" <christophe.bliard@...>

11 messages 2014/01/08

[#59791] About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>

A while ago I created a proof-of-concept that I intended to use in my

16 messages 2014/01/15
[#59794] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2014/01/15

On 15 Jan 2014, at 11:58, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@gmail.com> =

[#59808] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...> 2014/01/16

Em 15-01-2014 19:42, Eric Hodel escreveu:

[#59810] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net> 2014/01/16

On 16 Jan 2014, at 02:15, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@gmail.com> =

[#59826] Re: About unmarshallable DRb objects life-time — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...> 2014/01/17

Em 16-01-2014 19:43, Eric Hodel escreveu:

[ruby-core:60393] [ruby-trunk - Feature #8987] map/collect extension which handles arguments

From: matthew@...
Date: 2014-01-31 23:23:21 UTC
List: ruby-core #60393
Issue #8987 has been updated by Matthew Kerwin.


 On Jan 31, 2014 6:20 PM, <sowieso@dukun.de> wrote:
 >
 > Actually I believe the most readable form would be
 >
 > `p [1,2,3,4].map{ 4 + _ }  # when there is no |...|, set block params to _ `
 >
 > Many blocks in realworld-code are so easy, that it is really a barrier to
 have to think about a name, and therefore one uses often non-verbose names
 like you used x. Where is the point in being forced to think of a name,
 when you don't set the name to something meaningful. I guess this was the
 idea why the to_proc convention was introduced. The problem with it is,
 that it is really limiting because you cannot use parameters (and the
 presence of a parameter doesn't necessarily make problems so complex to
 justify a name).
 
 I guess you can solve it by syntax or by convention. I've, personally,
 never had a pause when calling it 'x' or 'item', depending on the context.
 You could also develop the convention of: arr.map{|_| ... }
 
 My only problem with magic variables is that I can never remember when they
 get (re)assigned. It's particularly annoying in perl, because those guys
 never assign a variable when $_ will suffice.
 
 Matthew Kerwin

----------------------------------------
Feature #8987: map/collect extension which handles arguments
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8987#change-44866

* Author: So Wieso
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Category: core
* Target version: current: 2.2.0
----------------------------------------
Please consider extending map/collect by allowing additional arguments to be passed to proc, like:
A: [1,2,3,4].map :+, 4
and/or
B: [1,2,3,4].map 4, &:+

=> [5, 6, 7, 8]

Variant A is probably more readable. Variant B is more versatile (allows arbitrary arguments to be passed to block).


---Files--------------------------------
mappi.rb (410 Bytes)


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

In This Thread