Issue #4824 has been updated by graywolf (Gray Wolf).


I'm not a native English speaker, so this whole comment might be completely off,
but at least to me the ending `~able?` implies that it is possible to use it
that way, not necessarily that is was used that way.

So `Kernel#executable?` tells me that something is able to be executed, not that
it was in fact executed. `is_standalone?` imho suffers from the same thing (btw
why not just `standalone?`).

At least to me `Kernel#executed?` looks better.

But I like `__MAIN__` or `Kernel#main?` the best.


----------------------------------------
Feature #4824: Provide method Kernel#executed?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4824#change-70776

* Author: lazaridis.com (Lazaridis Ilias)
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
The current construct to execute main code looks not very elegant:

~~~ruby
if __FILE__ == $0
  my_main()          # call any method or execute any code
end
~~~

With a `Kernel#executed?` method, this would become more elegant:

~~~ruby
if executed?
  #do this
  #do that
  my_main()
end
~~~

or

~~~ruby
main() if executed?
~~~

This addition would not break any existent behaviour.




-- 
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>