Actions
Bug #13404
closedHash#any? yields arguments to lambdas with proc semantics
Status:
Rejected
Assignee:
-
Target version:
-
ruby -v:
ruby 2.4.1p111 (2017-03-22 revision 58053) [x86_64-darwin16]
Description
l = ->(a, b) { true }
# Raises; Uses Enumerable#all?
{1 => 2}.all?(&l)
# Does not raise; Uses specialized Hash#any?
{1 => 2}.any?(&l)
The Enumerable
behavior was changed (correctly) in #12705, but the Hash#any?
implementation (introduced in r46866) still allows the lax behavior.
Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) over 7 years ago
- Is duplicate of Bug #13391: wrong number of arguments error for Hash#map when lambda given added
Updated by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) over 7 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Rejected
We continues to discuss #13391
Actions
Like0
Like0Like0