From: Matthew Harris <shugotenshi@...>
Date: 2006-06-26T20:01:05+09:00
Subject: Re: << for Hash?

I like Michael's solution.

The {}'s are not needed, as long as the hash is the only or last
argument to a method.

{:a => 1, :b => 2}.merge(:c => 3, :d => 4)
#=> {:a => 1, :b => 2, :c => 3, :d => 4)

On 6/26/06, Michael Fellinger <m.fellinger@gmail.com> wrote:
> {:foo,1}.merge! :bar => 2
> # {:foo=>1, :bar=>2}
>
> On Monday 26 June 2006 13:11, Simon Baird wrote:
> > class Hash
> >   def <<(arg)
> >     self.merge!(arg)
> >   end
> > end
> >
> > Eg,
> >
> > thing = {
> >
> >   :foo => 1,
> >
> > }
> >
> > thing << {
> >
> >   :bar => 2,
> >   :
> >    :baz => 3,
> >
> > }
> >
> > thing #=> {:foo=>1, :bar=>2, :baz=>3 }
> >
> >
> > Of course it overwrites existing keys. I think it's a little sexier than
> >
> > thing.merge!({
> >
> >    :bar => 2,
> >    :baz => 3,
> >
> > })
> >
> > or
> >  thing[:bar] = 1
> > thing[:baz] = 3
> >
> >
> > Is it safe to use this? Is there some good reason why << is not already
> > defined for Hash?
> >
> > Simon
> > (newbie)
> >
> > Ps, my first ruby project:
> > http://tiddlyspot.com/
>
>


-- 
Matt