[#74190] [Ruby trunk Feature#12134] Comparison between `true` and `false` — duerst@...
Issue #12134 has been updated by Martin D端rst.
3 messages
2016/03/07
[#74269] Type systems for Ruby — Rob Blanco <ml@...>
Dear ruby-core,
5 messages
2016/03/10
[#74395] [Ruby trunk Feature#12142] Hash tables with open addressing — shyouhei@...
Issue #12142 has been updated by Shyouhei Urabe.
3 messages
2016/03/17
[ruby-core:74250] [Ruby trunk Feature#12157] Is the option hash necessary for future Rubys?
From:
justcolin@...
Date:
2016-03-09 21:25:10 UTC
List:
ruby-core #74250
Issue #12157 has been updated by Colin Fulton. Tracker changed from Bug to Feature Sorry, I accidentally marked this as a bug. Moving it to features. ---------------------------------------- Feature #12157: Is the option hash necessary for future Rubys? https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12157#change-57383 * Author: Colin Fulton * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- Option hashes were great before Ruby had named arguments, but with the addition of named arguments and the double splat operator are they still needed? One can convert named arguments into an option hash by using the double splat operator in the parameter list, so option hashes are redundant. More importantly, the existence of both option hashes and named arguments is creating odd or ugly edge cases. See #12022, #10708, and #11860. Legacy software can mostly be updated using a double splatted parameter, so it shouldn't be a hard shift to make. What do you all think? _Apologies if this discussion has happened before. I searched for a bit but couldn't turn anything up._ -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>