[#77789] [Ruby trunk Feature#12012] Add Boolean method — prodis@...
Issue #12012 has been updated by Fernando Hamasaki de Amorim.
4 messages
2016/10/27
[ruby-core:77683] [Ruby trunk Bug#11929] No programatic way to check ability to dup/clone an object
From:
duerst@...
Date:
2016-10-20 09:11:57 UTC
List:
ruby-core #77683
Issue #11929 has been updated by Martin D端rst. Assignee set to Yukihiro Matsumoto I clearly prefer the last proposal (fail silently). That would make for a much more unified, streamlined protocol, avoiding needless exposition of internals. It would do exactly what dup (and clone) are described to do, namely (pretend to) return a shallow copy. ---------------------------------------- Bug #11929: No programatic way to check ability to dup/clone an object https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11929#change-60967 * Author: xavier nayrac * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto * ruby -v: ruby 2.3.0dev (2015-12-06 trunk 52904) [i686-linux] * Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN, 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- We can't dup a Fixnum, and it's ok. But I'm wondering 束why is Fixnum saying it can dup?損 ~~~ 1.respond_to?(:dup) #=> true ~~~ Don't you think that the `dup` method should be undefined in the class Fixnum? Currently I can do `class Fixnum; undef :dup; end`, but that should be in the core Ruby, isn't it? -- 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>