From: Brian Maddy Date: 2011-06-03T22:30:44+09:00 Subject: What would you guys think about adding the Thrush combinator to Object? Hello, I'd like to get some peoples' opinion on this. I recently needed to make a change to an enumerator that changed the number of items in the enumerator. I wanted to be able to chain this function in like map and inject, but it needed to operate on the enumerator, not just the items in it. Adding functions like this to the Object or Enumerator class seemed like poor design (since there could be many of them). I was surprised to find out that there isn't a Thrush combinator function on the Object class. I ended up copying the code Reganwald (https://github.com/raganwald/homoiconic/blob/master/2008-10-30/thrush.markdown#readme) and wanted to see if anyone else thought it would be a good addition to the Ruby language. Here's the code: class Object def into(expr = nil) expr.nil? ? yield(self) : expr.to_proc.call(self) end end Thoughts? Here's my situation in more detail for those who are interested: I had some data like this: orig_data = [{:type => :products, :ids => [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]}, {:type => :stores, :ids => [6, 7, 8, 9]}] that I needed to split into smaller chunks, like this: [{:type => :products, :ids => [1, 2]}, {:type => :products, :ids => [3, 4]}, {:type => :products, :ids => [5]}, {:type => :stores, :ids => [6, 7]}, {:type => :stores, :ids => [8, 9]}] My function for splitting them was pretty simple, but had to take in an enumerator: def slice_by_ids(hashes) Enumerator.new do |yielder| hashes.each do |hash| hash[:ids].each_slice(2) do |slice| yielder.yield hash.merge(:ids => slice) end end end end This function seemed way too specific to put on the Enumerator class, but if we had the Thrush combinator we could do something like this: orig_data.into(&method(:slice_by_ids)) This is also still easily chainable and maintains laziness: orig_data. lazy_map(&method(:do_stuff)). into(&method(:slice_by_ids)). lazy_map(&method(:do_other_stuff))