Project

General

Profile

Actions

Feature #6126

closed

Introduce yes/no constants aliases for true/false

Added by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago. Updated about 12 years ago.

Status:
Rejected
Assignee:
-
Target version:
-
[ruby-core:43148]

Description

I propose to have predefined constants of TrueClass and FalseClass - yes/no accordingly.
Benefits:

  1. 'truefalse'.size - 'yesno'.size = 4 (!)
  2. much more understandable and reasonable words. Well known by everybody on this planet.
  3. would be nice feature to introduce. Object#no? so we could use.
    puts 'horay!' unless will_you_marry_me.no?
    but it is very small thing, !will_you_marry_me behaves the same.. nevermind if it doesn't look useful
  4. in further releases of ruby we could use them by default and keep true/false only for compatibility e.g.:
    [2] pry(main)> true
    => yes

to discuss:

  1. how to manage with true-false constants
  2. do you like it?

P.S. I hope it is not crazy proposal for Ruby 4.9.3. I believe that ruby is agile enough. thoughts?


Related issues 1 (0 open1 closed)

Has duplicate Ruby master - Feature #9107: Introduce YES and NO as aliases of true and falseRejected11/13/2013Actions

Updated by burnhype (Sebastian Sito) about 12 years ago

Considering your poor english I'm able to belive that you are not joking.

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

@sebastian will you forgive me if I ask you to align topic?

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

References:
http://www.otierney.net/objective-c.html

it's common practice to define constants YES Yes in all languages and it seems widely used.

Plain and straight syntax. It's all about ruby, isn't it? :
puts -> p
null -> nil
.to_string -> to_s

Updated by burnhype (Sebastian Sito) about 12 years ago

That wasn't offense at all. There was a hype on Twitter about your Borat-like sentences (which were treated positive and funny) so this was a little pinch to them.

Anyway, to say something on topic. I don't like the idea.

"much more understandable and reasonable words. Well known by everybody on this planet"
Programming language is for programmers and true/false are very well known among them. No need for new aliases IMO.

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

@sebastian Yes they are for programmers. And there were no need for C/C++/... because assembler commands were very well known among programmers. Is it fair enough?
PLs need to evolve. And move on with standards too.

I don't mind jokes on me but I didn't get that one, nevermind then.

Updated by greyblake (Sergey Potapov) about 12 years ago

New aliases lead to more code mess and mixing yes/no and true/false styles. Newbies would get only more confused seeing things like this.

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

It is good point but would you consider it like if/unless? they do same job but used in proper places.
p 1 if yes
p 2 unless no

Newbies learn rapidly. And 'yes/no' thing will be the first thing they will like in ruby(in the same time obscure 'true/false' is what other languages can suggest)

the issue seems even newbie-friendly and it is benefit too.

ps just, isn't this awesome?
user_authenticated = yes

Updated by ujihisa (Tatsuhiro Ujihisa) about 12 years ago

I don't agree with the suggestion.

yes = either true or false

"Did you eat sushi?": "Yes I did" = true
"Didn't you eat sushi?": "Yes I did" = false

Giving Hai/Iie as true/false makes more sense in this case. Yes/no are ambiguous.

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

@ujihisa (Tatsuhiro Ujihisa) hrm.. Are you trying to inject english grammar in the logic? And, What is wrong with
"Didn't you eat sushi?": "Yes I did" = false
There is an ambiguity if you only use x.didnt_you_do_y? instead of x.did_you_do_y? and that is a very rare case.
But, honestly, I see some ambiguous things. In those cases you should better use true/false if would like to. Anyway it is just a habit IMO

Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 12 years ago

Egor Homakov wrote:

  1. do you like it?

false

Updated by daz (Dave B) about 12 years ago

#- You can please yourself in your own programs by
#- adding a couple of lines at the top.

#====================#
class Object
def yes?; self end
def no?; !self end
end
#====================#

def test(proposal_accepted)
puts
puts proposal_accepted ? 'Hooray!' : 'Booooo!'
puts proposal_accepted.yes? ? 'Hooray!' : 'Booooo!'
puts !proposal_accepted ? 'Hooray!' : 'Booooo!'
puts proposal_accepted.no? ? 'Hooray!' : 'Booooo!'
end

test true

#=> Hooray!
#=> Hooray!
#=> Booooo!
#=> Booooo!

test false

#=> Booooo!
#=> Booooo!
#=> Hooray!
#=> Hooray!

#- I wouldn't recommend it; your suggestion
#- seems to require extra typing:

p '.yes?'.size - ''.size #=> 5
p '.no?'.size - '!'.size #=> 3

#- daz

Updated by homakov (Egor Homakov) about 12 years ago

@Dave wow, you win.
I just was jealous to this obj-c thing.

Anybody pls close the issue

Updated by ujihisa (Tatsuhiro Ujihisa) about 12 years ago

  • Status changed from Open to Rejected

Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) about 12 years ago

Off topic.

I really hate the names "true" and "false" for another reason:
their length should be equal. For the same reason, I also hate
yes/no, in/out, width/height, left/right, etc.

I want to see these BUGS were fixed in English 2.0.

--
Yusuke Endoh

Updated by nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada) about 12 years ago

Hi,

(12/03/11 6:03), Yusuke Endoh wrote:

I really hate the names "true" and "false" for another reason:
their length should be equal. For the same reason, I also hate
yes/no, in/out, width/height, left/right, etc.

Third party's issue. Report to the upstream.

You can use :true and false instead, in Ruby at least.

--
Nobu Nakada

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF

Like0
Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0Like0