So we will have the questionable (as confusing for promise library users) `then` in 2.6? There were a lot of concerns mentioned above. `to_be` (or other suggestions) wouldn't have these problems. I would advice to re-think this one final...sowieso (So Wieso)
I tried to structure my post to make it clear that there a two different types of uses for ranges. Of course `..5` where the left bound is -∞, wouldn't make sense for iterating. But being able to skip the right bound, but not the left,...sowieso (So Wieso)
I like this change. **As for general ranges**: I was somewhat comfortable with `.step`, but this is much nicer. Having a short global variable for Float::INFINITY would be fine too, imho. Something like `0..Inf` or `0..INF`. **...sowieso (So Wieso)
I just like to stress that having an easy and short name is more important than having a name that correctly describes the behaviour. *`tap`* is also a horrible name that every ruby newbie has to look up first, still it is loved in the c...sowieso (So Wieso)
Michael Gee wrote: > I don't like changing `require` with one argument to mean something else. It would break too much legacy code. You are definitely right here, we should not do that. Nobuyoshi Nakada wrote: > ... Is it? If th...sowieso (So Wieso)
I chose the symbol `:Lib`, as I thought Ruby would complain if the constant `Lib` would not exist at this time. The keyword `in` would define it, if it would not exist. I would prefer if we could solve it without using symbols, but writi...sowieso (So Wieso)
When requiring a library, global namespace always gets polluted, at least with one module name. So when requiring a gem with many dependencies, at least one constant enters global namespace per dependency, which can easily get out of han...sowieso (So Wieso)
Hi, I'm against it :-) Nobody is forced to use it, and for short scripts it can be quite useful. For example to fetch some websites, if they exist: ```ruby require 'open-uri' urls = … urls.each do |url| open(url) do #save...sowieso (So Wieso)