Bug #13404: Hash#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]
• Backport: 2.2: UNKNOWN, 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN

[nelhage (Nelson Elhage)]

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.

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Is duplicate of Bug #13391: wrong number of arguments error for Hash#map when lambda given added

[hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA)]

• Status changed from Open to Rejected

We continues to discuss #13391