I see that `$.` is already a <a href="https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/2.4.0/globals_rdoc.html">pre-defined variable</a> which would make `$.method_name` difficult to parse. Then `_$` looks a little bit too close to the pre-defined variable...maedi (Maedi Prichard)
How about `_@`? It's your friendly neighborhood local-instance variable. I'm half joking but it is a local variable that refers to instances. It's nice and illegal: ```ruby [1, 2, 3].each { puts _@ } ``` Looks better when it's n...maedi (Maedi Prichard)
jeremyevans says: > we should limit support to a single argument, and use @ to represent the argument. > ... Well said. Completely agree!maedi (Maedi Prichard)
I believe a bare `@` should still be implemented as it reconciles the original need of the ticket of “hard to read code” and “a readable named variable to refer to the first argument“, as well as matz’s “not fully satisfied with the beau...maedi (Maedi Prichard)
Great explanation, thanks :) If it will be multiple params `@1`, `@2`, etc. Can we also have `@` aliasing `@1`? I think it's going to be a common use case to just have the one param.maedi (Maedi Prichard)
jeremyevans0, is it possible to have method/property calls that when without an object, reference the "current item" of the block they are in? ```ruby posts.each { .author = 'Santa Clause' } ``` This stops the range situation (`..`)....maedi (Maedi Prichard)
Why not a single dot? (`.`) It mirrors the UNIX concept of "current directory": ```ruby [1, 2, 3].each { puts . } ``` With a method/property: ```ruby posts.each { ..author = 'Santa Clause' } ``` Keeps it simple. Makes it easier...maedi (Maedi Prichard)
I think the usefulness of this feature is when there's only one parameter. When there's multiple parameters it becomes more confusing to read `@1`, `@2`, `@3` and less confusing to just name the variables. I think limiting the "magic ...maedi (Maedi Prichard)
maedi (Maedi Prichard)05:18 AM Ruby Feature #18980: `it` as a default block parameter