Issue #13904 has been updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler).


> evil things for optimization and specialization

Reminds me of good old evil.rb - now I am suddenly all for it! :-)

I have no particular pro or con opinion here but I think that one of ruby's philosophy is to put trust into the ruby hacker to do what he/she wants to do, e. g. duck patching modifying any of ruby's core functionality, use .send() or .instance_variable_get at leisure etc... ruby is very flexible. Encapsulation is possible but it also restricts, so it is not always ruby's philosophy. That is why, I think, .public_send() was added and people can use that for the public/private distinction. I myself love .send(), freedom to all objects and all duckling objects. \o/

By the way, the idea of composite objects reminds me a bit of what matz wrote about interface objects (specification where objects should respond to the same method-behaviour ... all ducks should be able to quack and swim ... so if something quacks and swims, even if it is a wolf disguised as a sheep, it may be treated to be an "acceptable duck").

But as said, I really am neutral here either way. :-)

Perhaps the ruby core team can discuss this a bit (I don't know japanese so I do not know what thoughts are conveyed above).



----------------------------------------
Feature #13904: getter for original information of Enumerator
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13904#change-66748

* Author: znz (Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: knu (Akinori MUSHA)
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
At https://gitter.im/red-data-tools/ja?at=59b0aaa097cedeb04828e268 ,
mrkn says narray and pycall use internal information of ruby to check `Range#step(n)`.

People of red-data-tools/ja suggest subclass of Enumerator.
But I think it does not match Ruby's '大クラス主義' (I don't know this word in English), so I suggest to add some methods to Enumerator class.

proof of concept attached.

Usage:

```
% irb -r irb/completion --simple-prompt
>> e=(1..2).step(3)
=> #<Enumerator: 1..2:step(3)>
>> e.receiver
=> 1..2
>> e.method_name
=> :step
>> e.arguments
=> [3]
```

`#method` is conflict with `Kernel#method`, so use `#method_name` instead.


---Files--------------------------------
poc.diff (1.42 KB)


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

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request / ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>