From: Roger Pack <rogerpack2005@...>
Date: 2009-04-11T15:30:54+09:00
Subject: Re: a few thoughts for ruby...

Thanks for the reply Joel.

>> 1) add an Object#in? method to complement the existing Array#include?
> 
> It's not really symmetrical. Array has an #include? method because it is
> a collection. Object has #in? because it is--what? A potential member of
> a collection?

Yeah.  I'm not saying it's symmetric as much as useful and 
intuitive--some of the big reasons I like Ruby :)
Would #within? be better?

> I've wanted that, and ended up with:
> 
>    ALL_NETWORK_ERRORS = [Errno::ECONNRESET, Errno::ECONNABORTED,
>      Errno::ECONNREFUSED, Errno::EPIPE, IOError, Errno::ETIMEDOUT]
> 
>    ALL_NETWORK_ERRORS << Errno::EPROTO if defined?(Errno::EPROTO)
>    ALL_NETWORK_ERRORS << Errno::ENETUNREACH if defined?(Errno::ENETUNREACH)

Looks like it would indeed be useful--especially for cross platform 
where you 'wish you didnt have to know them all for every platform' 
(there really are a lot of them -- see 
http://betterlogic.com/roger/?p=1223 as an example).

> Maybe a better way would be to include a module, AnyNetworkError, in
> each of these. Then you could...

Yeah, or have them all descend from a single ancestor.  I would say just 
descend from SocketError except that SocketError is actually raised as 
an exception itself, every so often, so it has its own meaning 
currently...though I guess that doesn't stop it from being an ancestor.

> module E; end
...
> begin
>    raise E1, "foo"
> rescue E => ex
>    p ex
> end

That's pretty elegant.  With an array you can [non intuitively] also get 
by:

> begin
>    raise SocketError "foo"
> rescue *ALL_NETWORK_ERRORS  => ex
>    p ex
> end
(I'm sure you knew that).


>> 4) (this one's controversial) remove the extra # for code in strings
>> (i.e. "string#{code}") -> "string{code}" less typing.
> 
> Would not like having to escape { in strings...

Ok. This next isn't meant as an attacking question but...do you use { in 
normal strings often?  Granted probably more than #, but...?

Thanks!
-=r
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.