From: matthew@... Date: 2017-11-29T21:33:13+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:83985] [Ruby trunk Feature#14136] Implement #empty? on more classes Issue #14136 has been updated by phluid61 (Matthew Kerwin). mikegee (Michael Gee) wrote: > > I am proposing that all classes that implement `#size` or `#length` should also implement `#empty?` to let developers write clearer code. This is one of the Rubocop cops I always disable, because I don't find #empty? conceptually clearer (or necessarily even accurate) unless that's what I wrote in the first place. `File.stat` is a perfect example: the status object isn't empty. Adding this method would make Ruby code *less* clear, more idiosyncratic. ---------------------------------------- Feature #14136: Implement #empty? on more classes https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14136#change-68064 * Author: mikegee (Michael Gee) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: ---------------------------------------- Hi Ruby Friends! Rubocop prefers `#empty?` over `length == 0` and `size == 0`, which is great for `String`, `Array`, `Hash`, etc. It would be nice if more classes implemented `#empty?` for consistency. See related discussion at https://github.com/bbatsov/rubocop/issues/2841. I started this work at https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/1759 Thanks! -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: