Re: semenatics of if/unless/while statement modifiers

Eric Hodel wrote:

> On Nov 21, 2005, at 9:37 PM, Stefan Kaes wrote:
>
>> I find it rather inelegant to be forced into writing
>>
>>   if x = options[:x]
>>     f(x)
>>   end
>>
>> or even
>>
>>  f(options[:x]) if options[:x]
>>
>> instead of
>>
>>  f(x) if x=options[:x]
>
>
> f options[:x] if options.include? :x

This doesn't solve the problem of accessing the hash twice and computing 
the hash of the lookup key twice. And it's even more text than before.

>
>> The Rails source code is literally messed up with the second  
>> variant, which is potentially slower too.
>
>
> I've found several parts of the Rails source code to be very un- 
> Rubyish.  I would not necessarily equate a line of Rails code to a  
> problem with Ruby itself.

I didn't. It was only an example.

-- stefan