Issue #10450 has been updated by Joshua Ballanco.


Ok, yes...but if your intention with this feature request is simply to treat the multiple-assignment statement as a whole as the test condition, you can already do that like so:

~~~
if _ = (a, b = *multi_ret_val_meth)
  puts "Multi-return statement is true"
end
~~~

Personally, I think this is a small price to pay (one underscore, one equals, two parens) to get the semantics you desire. The error condition for a naked multi-assignment in a conditional seems like a sensible guard for newcomers who don't realize that multi-assignment can have odd semantics depending on the rhs structure.

----------------------------------------
Bug #10450: multiple assignment in conditional
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/10450#change-49788

* Author: bug hit
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Category: 
* Target version: 
* ruby -v: ruby 2.1.4p265 (2014-10-27 revision 48166) [x86_64-linux]
* Backport: 2.0.0: UNKNOWN, 2.1: UNKNOWN
----------------------------------------
multiple assignment is an expression whose value can be truthy (array) or falsy (nil, false), so why is there a restriction on its use in conditionals?  A warning perhaps is justified, but a syntax error, why?


irb(main):001:0> if a, b = nil then 1 else 0 end
SyntaxError: (irb):1: syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting keyword_then or ';' or '\n'
if a, b = nil then 1 else 0 end
     ^
(irb):1: syntax error, unexpected keyword_then, expecting end-of-input
if a, b = nil then 1 else 0 end
                  ^
	from /home/alex/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/bin/irb:11:in `<main>'
irb(main):002:0> if (a, b = nil) then 1 else 0 end
SyntaxError: (irb):2: multiple assignment in conditional
	from /home/alex/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/bin/irb:11:in `<main>'
irb(main):003:0> (a, b = nil) ? 1 : 0
SyntaxError: (irb):3: multiple assignment in conditional
	from /home/alex/.rbenv/versions/2.1.4/bin/irb:11:in `<main>'
irb(main):004:0> (a, b = nil)
=> nil




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