From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2005-04-23T20:40:53+09:00
Subject: Re: Suggestion: Hash.remove

Hi --

On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Lyndon Samson wrote:

> On 4/23/05, Andrew Walrond <andrew@walrond.org> wrote:
>> Something I often find useful is a version of Hash.delete which returns the
>> hash rather than the deleted item. Useful for terse chained code.
>>
>> class Hash
>>  def remove!(*some_keys)
>>    some_keys.each { |key| delete(key) }
>>    return self
>>  end
>>  def remove(*some_keys)
>>    return dup.remove!(*some_keys)
>>  end
>> end
>>
>> Perhaps something like it is already planned for the next version? If not,
>> perhaps the Hash maintainer might consider something like it.
>>
>
> I think there is a bias against method chaining by the Ruby Powers-that-Be.

I don't think so -- just a design decision in the case of bang methods
(they don't generally return self when there's no change, so they
can't be chained).  It's a little tricky with hashes, because the
standard currency, so to speak, of a lot of Enumerable methods is the
array.  So if you do, for example, find, select, reject, map, etc. on
a hash, you get back an array.


David

-- 
David A. Black
dblack@wobblini.net