< :前の番号
^ :番号順リスト
> :次の番号
P :前の記事（スレッド移動）
N :次の記事（スレッド移動）
|<:前のスレッド
>|:次のスレッド
^ :返事先
_:自分への返事
>:同じ返事先を持つ記事（前）
<:同じ返事先を持つ記事（後）
---:分割してスレッド表示、再表示
| :分割して（縦）スレッド表示、再表示
~ :スレッドのフレーム消去
.:インデックス
..:インデックスのインデックス
Issue #16102 has been updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler).
I have no particular pro/con opinion on the suggested functionality here itself.
In my opinion, this is mostly a design consideration for how "useful" matz
wants to see symbols being used in ruby. (This may not be directly related
to the comment here, but more generally in how simple, complex or useful
matz may want to see symbols.)
On a side note, it is (to me) interesting that sawa is not the only one
with somewhat related ideas in this regard, as he has pointed out via
mentioning https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12115. :)
----------------------------------------
Feature #16102: `Symbol#call`
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16102#change-80748
* Author: sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* Target version:
----------------------------------------
Since symbols have a `to_proc` method, it is natural to expect that they would appear in a method chain like:
```ruby
:some_symbol.to_proc.call(...)
```
In fact, I have use cases like this:
```ruby
arrays = [["a", "b"], ["c"], ["d", "e"]]
hashes = [{"a" => 1}, {"b" => 2, "c" => 3}, {"d" => 4, "e" => 5}]
:product.to_proc.(*arrays) # => [["a", "c", "d"], ["a", "c", "e"], ["b", "c", "d"], ["b", "c", "e"]]
:zip.to_proc.(*arrays) # => [["a", "c", "d"], ["b", nil, "e"]]
:union.to_proc.(*arrays) # => ["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"]
:merge.to_proc.(*hashes) # => {"a"=>1, "b"=>2, "c"=>3, "d"=>4, "e"=>5}
```
I request `Symbol#call` to be defined, which would implicitly call `to_proc` on the receiver and then the conventional `Proc#call` on the result. Then, I can do:
```ruby
:product.(*arrays) # => [["a", "c", "d"], ["a", "c", "e"], ["b", "c", "d"], ["b", "c", "e"]]
:zip.(*arrays) # => [["a", "c", "d"], ["b", nil, "e"]]
:union.(*arrays) # => ["a", "b", "c", "d", "e"]
:merge.(*hashes) # => {"a"=>1, "b"=>2, "c"=>3, "d"=>4, "e"=>5}
```
This would solve what proposals #6499, #6727, #7444, #8970, #11262 aim to do.
Notice that proposals #12115 and #15301 ask for `Symbol#call`, but they ask for different things (a method that returns a proc), and are irrelevant to the current proposal.
--
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>