From: "Gerardo Santana Gómez Garrido" <gerardo.santana@...>
Date: 2006-04-20T04:13:19+09:00
Subject: Re: Symbol#to_proc is just so beautiful

2006/4/19, Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@gmail.com>:
> Berger, Daniel wrote:
> >>    [1, 2, 3].all? &:positive?  => true
> >>    [-1, 2, 3].all? &:positive? => false
> > There must be a way to ditch that '&' somehow.  I'd prefer this:
> > [1,2,3].all?(:positive?)
>
> The beauty of Symbol#to_proc is that you don't need to change any method
> definitions for it to work; any method that yields a single argument can
> take a symbol proc as a block, and it'll work out of the box.
>
>    arr.any? &:positive?
>    arr.none? &:positive?
>    arr.each(&:upcase!)
>    arr.collect(&:downcase)

An approach similar to Facets' Enumerable#every would look better

arry.any?.positive?
arr.none?.positive?
arr.each.upcase!
arry.collect.downcase  # arry.every.downcase

But it would require modification of all those methods, like Jacob
says. It is worthwhile, in my opinion.

--
Gerardo Santana
"Between individuals, as between nations, respect for the rights of
others is peace" - Don Benito Ju�rez
http://santanatechnotes.blogspot.com/