Issue #11167 has been reported by Robert A. Heiler.

----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

  if hash.has_key?
  if hash.key?
  if cat.is_hungry?

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class Cat instance, with
an instance variable called @is_hungry, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these @ivars through attr_* right now as is
already, such as:


    attr_reader :foo
    def foo; @foo; end

    attr_writer :foo
    def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

    attr_accessor :foo
    ^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  attr_query

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All attr_* that would end with a ? token, would be a 
combination of attr_reader and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

attr_reader :foo?

Would create both a method foo() and foo?().

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

attr_reader :foo

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through attr_query())

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!



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