Issue #13904 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).


This seems fine but very specific.
I still think exposing an Enumerator's receiver, method name and arguments is better as it is more general, intuitive and useful.

I don't think there is anything wrong with checking the condition mentioned above by @knu in e.g. pycall.rb for #[].

----------------------------------------
Feature #13904: getter for original information of Enumerator
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13904#change-71021

* Author: znz (Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA)
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: mrkn (Kenta Murata)
* 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>