From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2009-08-20T21:45:28+09:00
Subject: Re: #has_arguments?

2009/8/20 Brian Candler <b.candler@pobox.com>:
> Robert Klemme wrote:
>> As a side note: I see this sometimes
>>
>> def m(a = nil)
>>   @a = a.nil? ? 123 : a
>> end
>>
>> which is of course silly.  The same would be much better expressed as
>>
>> def m(a = 123)
>>   @a = a
>> end
>
> No, it's not the same.

Can you explain what the differences are?

> Consider:
>
>  def foo(a = nil)
>    m(a)
>  end
>
>  foo()

I do not see the connection of this to what I posted.

> It saves replicating your default values all over the place, which isn't
> very DRY.

I don't see how this makes me replicate my default values all over the
place.  My proposed solution just changes how a method internally
works, there is _no_ effect on the interface.

> Or you could more simply write
>
>  def m(a = nil)
>    @a = a || 123
>  end

I fail to see how this is simpler than

def m(a = 123)
  @a = a
end

I'm in line with Rick: either _I_ must be missing something - or _you_. :-)

Cheers

robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/