Feature #18585: Promote find pattern to official feature

• Status: Closed
• Assignee: ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto)
• Target version: -

[ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto)]

"Find pattern" has introduced in 3.0 and it is still marked as an experimental.
I don't see any problems, so it is time to promote it to official feature.

(BTW, it was useful when writing code like the following for a practical example.)

if ary in [*, {a: 0, b: 1 | 2} => i, *]
  ...
end

[retro (Josef Šimánek)]

Hello! Is this request related to the whole feature (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html) or only to one pattern called "Find pattern" (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html#label-Patterns)?

[ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto)]

Is this request related to the whole feature (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html) or only to one pattern called "Find pattern" (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html#label-Patterns)?

There is no difference between the two.
Except find pattern, pattern matching is already official feature.

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

Accepted. Congratulations.

Matz.

[retro (Josef Šimánek)]

ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto) wrote in #note-2:

Is this request related to the whole feature (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html) or only to one pattern called "Find pattern" (as described at https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.1/doc/syntax/pattern_matching_rdoc.html#label-Patterns)?

There is no difference between the two.
Except find pattern, pattern matching is already official feature.

Thanks for the info.

matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote in #note-3:

Accepted. Congratulations.

Matz.

Would be PR welcomed for this change?

[ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Closed

Applied in changeset git|db6b23c76cbc7888cd9a9912790c2068703afdd0.

---

Find pattern is no longer experimental [Feature #18585]

[ktsj (Kazuki Tsujimoto)]

retro (Josef Šimánek) wrote in #note-4:

Would be PR welcomed for this change?

I've already merged the patch. Thanks.