From: fg@... Date: 2019-12-30T07:54:27+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:96590] [Ruby master Misc#16464] Which core objects should support deconstruct/deconstruct_keys? Issue #16464 has been updated by decuplet (Nikita Shilnikov). These probably should be filed as separate feature requests. I'm already using PM in production and the idea about deconstructing `Time` instances also came into my mind. `Object#deconstruct` is a lot more subtle, I wouldn't say it's _that_ obvious, I'd rather have it for some built-in classes such as `Time` or `Integer`. ---------------------------------------- Misc #16464: Which core objects should support deconstruct/deconstruct_keys? https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16464#change-83557 * Author: zverok (Victor Shepelev) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ---------------------------------------- Now, when pattern matching is out, I believe it is worth discussing which core and standard library objects should be matchable "out of the box". My proposals, as of now, are: **1. `Object#deconstruct`, returning `[self]`.** Justification: ```ruby # this works: 1 in Integer # this works: 1 in ..0 # this does NOT: 1 in Integer(..0) # NoMatchingPatternError (1) ``` I believe the latter example looks pretty logical (and can be used in some flexible methods like "if it is a positive integer, it is index in the array, if it is negative integer, it is backward index, and if it is float, it should be calculated as a mean of nearby elements") **2. `Time#deconstruct_keys`** Justification is obvious: ```ruby case created_at when year: 2019, month: 11..12 => m, day: p "Created at #{day}.#{m} this year" else # ... end ``` (Probably the same for `Date` and `DateTime`) **3. `Set#deconstruct`** Seems "logical" as set is a sequence, but I can't think of a good realistic example :) -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: