Feature #7388: Object#embed

• Status: Rejected
• Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version: 2.6

[zzak (zzak _)]

=begin
From github:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/67

Add Object#embed which works like tap but returns the block's value

This avoids breaking from method chains in many cases. I don't see any other way to do this without this method.

Can someone confirm pull request are a valid way of submitting patches ? I cannot register on the mailing list for some reason, it seems to be broken.

Example:

(({[ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}.embed{|x| {:total => x.count, :data => x}}}))
=end

[mame (Yusuke Endoh)]

• Status changed from Open to Assigned
• Assignee changed from mame (Yusuke Endoh) to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version set to 2.6

In principle, I have no right to judge a feature request.
Please ask matz.

My personal opinion: the method name will matter.

--
Yusuke Endoh [e-mail]

[marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)]

mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote:

My personal opinion: the method name will matter.

I'd even say that embed is wrong.

I would like to know of a good example of use case. I often succumb to the temptation of writing more complex code to avoid creating a local var, but that doesn't always make for better code.

The example given in the github PR was:

[ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}.embed{|x| {:total => x.count, :data => x}}...

I feel the following is clearer:

odd_nbs = [ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}
{:total => odd_nbs.count, :data => odd_nbs}...

Until I see a good use case (and a good method name is found), I'm -1 for this.

[nathan.f77 (Nathan Broadbent)]

I'd even say that embed is wrong.

I would like to know of a good example of use case. I often succumb to the
temptation of writing more complex code to avoid creating a local var, but
that doesn't always make for better code.

The example given in the github PR was:

[ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}.embed{|x| {:total => x.count, :data

=> x}}...

I feel the following is clearer:

odd_nbs = [ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}
{:total => odd_nbs.count, :data => odd_nbs}...

How about infix? I think this method could be a useful addition, even if
it's rarely used. Also, the example usage might be clearer with a better
block argument:

  [ 1, 2, 3, 4].select{|x| x.odd?}.infix{|odd_nbs| {:total => odd_nbs.count,

:data => odd_nbs}}

[trans (Thomas Sawyer)]

Is this #ergo? Also see #6721 and #6373.

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

• Status changed from Assigned to Rejected

=begin
I am against those names (not the feature).

: embed
the term 'embed' has different impression.

: infix
'infix' reminds me 'infix operators'.

: ergo
Latin? I am strongly against introducing non-popular non-English names as standard methods.

Basically it's too much for a method that can be defined in 3 lines in your code.
Come back if your think of another name.

Matz.

=end

[trans (Thomas Sawyer)]

=begin
I thought about a few terms that might work in both cases, i.e. the so called "embed" case of this issue and the "identity" case of #6373. All of the obvious plays on the term "self" didn't fair too well. So I took a step back and asked what it was the method was really asking for. I answered, "a reference to the object itself". So then, it occurred to me, what about #reference?

a.group_by(&:reference)

a.reference{ |r| ... }

=end

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Has duplicate Feature #12760: Optional block argument for `itself` added