From: eregontp@gmail.com
To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
Subject: [ruby-core:84782] [Ruby trunk Feature#14344] refine at class level
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2018 17:26:57 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <redmine.journal-69498.20180109172656.7b10518cf1644372@ruby-lang.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: redmine.issue-14344.20180109155454@ruby-lang.org
Issue #14344 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).
There is probably room for a shorter syntax for refinements.
But one thing which is not acceptable in this specific proposition here is that
~~~ ruby
class Test
refine String do
def refined?
true
end
end
# String refinements apply here
end
~~~
and
~~~ ruby
module Test
refine String do
def refined?
true
end
end
# String refinements do not apply here, it's a normal Module#refine
end
~~~
would do two very different things, which is too hard to understand and confusing.
Maybe a block to #using would make things slightly shorter:
~~~ ruby
class Test
using do
refine String do
def refined?
true
end
end
end
end
~~~
----------------------------------------
Feature #14344: refine at class level
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/14344#change-69498
* Author: kddeisz (Kevin Deisz)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* Target version:
----------------------------------------
I rely on refinements a lot, but don't want to keep writing `Module.new` in code. I'm proposing `Object::refine`, which would create an anonymous module behind the scenes with equivalent functionality. So:
~~~ ruby
class Test
using Module.new {
refine String do
def refined?
true
end
end
}
end
~~~
would become
~~~ ruby
class Test
refine String do
def refined?
true
end
end
end
~~~
It's a small change, but reads a lot more clearly. Thoughts?
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-09 17:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <redmine.issue-14344.20180109155454@ruby-lang.org>
2018-01-09 15:54 ` [ruby-core:84778] [Ruby trunk Feature#14344] refine at class level kevin.deisz
2018-01-09 16:38 ` [ruby-core:84779] " shevegen
2018-01-09 17:13 ` [ruby-core:84780] " eregontp
2018-01-09 17:19 ` [ruby-core:84781] " kevin.deisz
2018-01-09 17:26 ` eregontp [this message]
2018-01-09 17:31 ` [ruby-core:84783] " zverok.offline
2018-01-10 16:06 ` [ruby-core:84814] " kevin.deisz
2018-01-10 18:05 ` [ruby-core:84818] " eregontp
2018-01-10 18:22 ` [ruby-core:84819] " kevin.deisz
2018-04-11 14:45 ` [ruby-core:86511] " kevin.deisz
2018-04-16 10:03 ` [ruby-core:86550] " eregontp
2018-04-17 15:38 ` [ruby-core:86561] " kevin.deisz
2019-01-02 22:41 ` [ruby-core:90864] " dementiev.vm
2019-01-11 11:05 ` [ruby-core:91018] " shevegen
2019-01-11 16:04 ` [ruby-core:91026] " dementiev.vm
2019-02-07 6:35 ` [ruby-core:91452] " matz
2019-02-07 21:13 ` [ruby-core:91482] " dementiev.vm
2019-02-07 22:14 ` [ruby-core:91483] " matz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/community/mailing-lists/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=redmine.journal-69498.20180109172656.7b10518cf1644372@ruby-lang.org \
--to=ruby-core@ruby-lang.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).