[ruby-core:38623] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Open] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[ruby-core:38623] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Open] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Alexey Muranov]

Issue #5123 has been reported by Alexey Muranov.

----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:38697] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Assigned] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Kazuhiro NISHIYAMA.

Status changed from Open to Assigned
Assignee set to Yukihiro Matsumoto


----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:38698] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Michael Edgar]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Michael Edgar.


As a corollary, for a few months I had one portion of my code which used Sets, and relied on the fact that Sets in 1.9 retain their order because they in turn use a Hash. The only real way I could document this requirement was to put comments in capital letters in the relevant portions of code so that I didn't forget that I relied on this behavior.

If I had been creating "OrderedSets" (though this sounds too close to SortedSet despite meaning something different), and OrderedSets use an OrderedHash, then it would have been clear in the code that insertion order was preserved, especially for developers new to 1.9.

I like this idea.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:38732] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Thomas Sawyer]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Thomas Sawyer.


IWon't this break orderedhash gem? 

In any case, now that Hash preserves order, why would anyone ever think about changing it back and break old code?


----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:38740] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123][Open] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Anurag Priyam]

> It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
> That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
> (I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

This sounds like one of those variable names with a type prefixed to
it, like sequence_string, or sequence_array. They look ugly. It would
have mad more sense if Ruby were ever to ship with two different Hash
implementations. Besides, the aliasing can be done at the application
level too. So if the Hash implementation changes tomorrow, you are
free to re-alias to some other ordered hash implementation.

-- 
Anurag Priyam
http://about.me/yeban/

[ruby-core:38827] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Alexey Muranov]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Alexey Muranov.


Thomas Sawyer wrote:
> IWon't this break orderedhash gem? 
> 
> In any case, now that Hash preserves order, why would anyone ever think about changing it back and break old code?

To improve performance, for example, or to restore the original meaning of "hash".

Alexey Muranov.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:38828] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[Alexey Muranov]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Alexey Muranov.


Anurag Priyam wrote:

>  Besides, the aliasing can be done at the application
>  level too. So if the Hash implementation changes tomorrow, you are
>  free to re-alias to some other ordered hash implementation.

But then i will have to edit my code to upgrade to a new version of Ruby.

Alexey Muranov.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123

Author: Alexey Muranov
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
Category: 
Target version: 


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

[ruby-core:48483] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[yhara (Yutaka HARA)]

Issue #5123 has been updated by yhara (Yutaka HARA).

Category set to core
Target version set to next minor


----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-31812

Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:48680] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[headius (Charles Nutter)]

Issue #5123 has been updated by headius (Charles Nutter).


The decision is already made. Hash has been ordered since 1.9.1 (or 1.9.2?) and changing it now would break all code that expects ordering. Ordering also does not necessarily limit options for implementation...it just makes certain implementations less efficient.

There's a separate bug still being evaluated to add RBTree to core...perhaps that would fulfill what you need?
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-32122

Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:48683] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)]

Issue #5123 has been updated by alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov).


I was only proposing an alias for now.
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-32125

Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:49847] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[lancel (lancel lancel)]

Issue #5123 has been updated by lancel (lancel lancel).


=begin
All of us have read the stories of excite people's ((<lancel|URL:http://www.lancel1.com/>))  mind, the hero of the story to live only for a very limited time, sometimes up to a year, sometimes as short as one day. But we always want to know, the doomed choose how to spend their ((<sac lancel|URL:http://www.lancel1.com/>)) last days. Of course, I say is of free men who have a choice, not whose sphere of activities is strictly.458gyu854
=end

----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-33432

Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:49863] [ruby-trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[uggsoutlet (uggsoutlet uggsoutlet)]

Issue #5123 has been updated by uggsoutlet (uggsoutlet uggsoutlet).


=begin
would be an excellent rule. Such an attitude would emphasize  ((<uggs on sale|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) sharply the value of life. Every day we should with gentleness, vigor, hold ((<cheap ugg boots|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) the heart of thanksgiving to life. But when the time for endless days, months and years passed in  ((<uggs outlet|URL:http://www.gooduggboots.org/>)) front of us, we are often not the seed feeling. Of course, there is also " eat, drink, enjoy .458gyu854
=end
----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-33478

Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
Category: core
Target version: next minor


I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:72376] [Ruby trunk - Feature #5123] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[alexey.muranov]

Issue #5123 has been updated by Alexey Muranov.


I have just stumbled upon this: the [Immutable collections for JavaScript](http://facebook.github.io/immutable-js/) has both `Map` and [`OrderedMap`](http://facebook.github.io/immutable-js/docs/#/OrderedMap).

----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-55667

* Author: Alexey Muranov
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
----------------------------------------
I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

[ruby-core:85678] [Ruby trunk Feature#5123][Rejected] Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash

[matz]

Issue #5123 has been updated by matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto).

Status changed from Assigned to Rejected

Today, everyone knows Ruby's Hash is a OrderedHash.

Matz.


----------------------------------------
Feature #5123: Alias Hash 1.9 as OrderedHash
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5123#change-70474

* Author: alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)
* Status: Rejected
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
I read that it was a controversial decision to make Hash in Ruby 1.9 ordered.
It is not clear if the present implementation is the best possible.
I would like to express my thought.

It would be nice if the ordered Hash in Ruby 1.9 was aliased as OrderedHash.
That way people who rely on preserving the insertion order in some application (me, for example) could explicitly use OrderedHash, and developers of Ruby would be free to redefine Hash in future versions if a better implementation that a doubly-linked circular list is found.
(I read something about a possibility of using "red–black tree".)

Thanks.

Alexey Muranov.



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/