Issue #4475 has been updated by knu (Akinori MUSHA).


I would like the feature, but we have many things to think about.

We would not be able to make "it" a reserved keyword because that would destroy all existing RSpec code written in tens of thousands of projects.

If "it" were to be implemented as a method, how could we make it work inside of a BasicObject instance?  What if a method of the same name was defined?

If "it" were to be implemented as a local variable, should its name be included in `local_variables`?

All things considered, I guess the variable name would have to be $-something, if any.

----------------------------------------
Feature #4475: default variable name for parameter
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4475#change-71554

* Author: jordi (jordi polo)
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
=begin

There is a very common pattern in Ruby:

 object.method do |variable_name|
  variable_name doing something  
 end

 Many times in fact the name of the object is so self explanatory that we don't care about the name of the variable of the block. It is common to see things like :

 @my_sons.each { |s| s.sell_to_someone }

or

 Account.all.each { |a|  my_account << a.money }


 People tend to choose s or a because we have the class or the object name just there to remind you about the context. 


I would like to know if can be a good idea to have a default name for that parameter. I think it is Groovy that does something like:

  Account.all.each { my_account << it.money } 

Where it is automagically filled and it doesn't need to be declared.  

I think it is as readable or more (for newbies who don't know what is ||) and we save some typing :)


=end




-- 
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>