From: shevegen@... Date: 2017-03-23T20:32:41+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:80295] [Ruby trunk Feature#13303] String#any? as !String#empty? Issue #13303 has been updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler). Actually the name .nonempty? is easier to understand than .any? in this context, or non-empty strings. I think the only problem is that "nonempty" reads very ... strangely. I can not come up with a good name either though. .non_empty? May seem obvious but I am not sure either there since it is quite long. I think that nonempty? or non_empty? is better than any? in this context though. Ignoring the ruby parser, I guess this here would be one of the shortest, somewhat natural way to query and ask on an object: object, are you not empty object not empty? I guess the most natural ruby way would still be object.not_empty? object.non_empty? Or perhaps we can ask any container/object if it has at least one entry. :\ object.at_the_least_one_entry? The last one is a bit awful though - now .non_empty? or .non_empty? or .not_empty? would look nicer. :))) ---------------------------------------- Feature #13303: String#any? as !String#empty? https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13303#change-63765 * Author: naruse (Yui NARUSE) * Status: Feedback * Priority: Normal * Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) * Target version: ---------------------------------------- Once I proposed "some container#nonempty?" on #12075, and understand there's Array#any?. Today I found String doesn't have such method. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: