Issue #16182 has been updated by shevegen (Robert A. Heiler).


I can not comment/answer on the issue and questions; I think this is for
matz and the core team to decide either way, whatever the way.

I did, however had, want to add that:

    json in {a:, b:, c:}

is quite difficult to read (for me). So even if this may not be an ideal explanation,
but ... I would not be at all opposed to disallowing that, merely syntax-wise
alone. ;-)

(I do not really have a big opinion on the functionality in general but ideally
my personal taste is to prefer simpler syntax, whenever that is possible. We have
in general quite some suggestions that combine a lot of complex syntax together,
which I think is not ideal, in general; also in other proposals.)

----------------------------------------
Feature #16182: Should `expr in a, b, c` be allowed or not?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16182#change-81807

* Author: mame (Yusuke Endoh)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
In #15865, a new syntax `<expr> in <pattern>` was introduced.  By using this, we can write:

```
json = { foo: 1, bar: 2}

if json in { foo:, bar: }
  p [foo, bar] #=> [1, 2]
end
```

However, we cannot write:

```
p(json in { foo:, bar: }) #=> expected: true, actual: syntax error
```

This is because `<expr> in <pattern>` is an expression but not an argument.  For example, `foo(json in a, b, c)` is ambiguous: it is considered `foo((json in a), b, c)` and `foo((json in a, b, c))`.

What should we do?

1. Do nothing; we admit that it is a spec
2. Revert the feature
3. Disallow a pattern like `a, b, c` or `a:, b:, c:` in this one-line pattern matching syntax; we ask a user to write `json in [a, b, c]` or `json in {a:, b:, c:}`



-- 
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>