From: "Peña, Botp" <botp@...>
Date: 2005-07-11T19:18:19+09:00
Subject: Re: accessing index inside map

nobuyoshi nakada [mailto:nobuyoshi.nakada@ge.com] wrote:

#> You're vague plan produces clearer ruby.. 
#> 
#> but isn't 
#>     each_with_index.map
#> 
#> so close to being
#>     map_with_index
#> 
#> ?
#> 
#> (1..6).map_with_index{|x,i|[2,5].include?(i) ? x : x*2} is 
#very easy to my
#> tiny brain since all i have to remember is map (just like 
#(in array) all i
#> have to focus is each, then i follow thru with each_with_index)
#
#What about Enumerator#with_index?
#
#  [1,2,3,4,5,6].map.with_index {|x,i|[2,5].include?(i) ? x : x*2}

imho, #with_index pleads for a better name. It sounds far from being a
method; which leads me to incline back to your original proposition of

.each_with_index.map...

another concern also is that sir matz already warned me of the spilling of
the *_with_index naming all over the place..

OK, i'll be shooting for the moon here. How about passing a parameter? Is it
then possible to make #each or #map same behavior w #each_with_index or
#map_with_index or whatever *_with_index so that the ff works,

def each(with_index=true) do... end

def map(with_index=true) do ... end

and thus, we can do

[1,2,3,4,5,6].map(true) {|x,i|[2,5].include?(i) ? x : x*2}

I think this one does not break old code, no?


I find index being more of an attribute than a pure method.

And you are all right, I just need the index, why do i need another set of
methods?

Again, imho.

Thanks and kind regards -botp
















#
#-- 
#Nobu Nakada
#