Issue #4610 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh).


Hello,

jballanc (Joshua Ballanco) wrote:
> I very much like the proposal for a Proc#pass_option method. Should this be reopened or shall I file a separate bug for the implementation of Proc#pass_option?

It would be good to open another feature ticket.

We should find the better name than pass_option and discuss
use case (or, the reason why you want to use Proc#curry with
keyword argument).

-- 
Yusuke Endoh <mame / tsg.ne.jp>
----------------------------------------
Feature #4610: Proc#curry behavior is inconsistent with lambdas containing default argument values
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4610#change-25632

Author: jballanc (Joshua Ballanco)
Status: Rejected
Priority: Normal
Assignee: mame (Yusuke Endoh)
Category: 
Target version: 


If I curry a lambda with 3 arguments, then I can call three times with one argument each time to get the desired results:

ruby-1.9.2-p180 :001 > l = ->(a, b, c) { puts "#{a}, #{b}, #{c}" }
#<Proc:0x00000100963650@(irb):1 (lambda)>
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :002 > c = l.curry
#<Proc:0x0000010095c9e0 (lambda)>
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :003 > c.('one').('two').('three')
one, two, three
nil

However, if the lambda has default values and I curry it, the entire lambda is evaluated after the first #call:


ruby-1.9.2-p180 :004 > l = ->(a = 'ichi', b = 'ni', c = 'san') { puts "#{a}, #{b}, #{c}" }
#<Proc:0x00000100877b88@(irb):4 (lambda)>
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :005 > c = l.curry
#<Proc:0x0000010086b338 (lambda)>
ruby-1.9.2-p180 :006 > c.('one').('two').('three')
one, ni, san
NoMethodError: undefined method `call' for nil:NilClass

This behavior seem very inconsistent. Ideally, if I wanted to use the default argument at a certain position in a currie proc, I would just #call with no arguments, like so:

ruby-1.9.2-p180 :007 > c.('one').().('three')
#=> Propose that this result in: "one, ni, three"



-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/