ruby-core@ruby-lang.org archive (unofficial mirror)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: XrXr@users.noreply.github.com
To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
Subject: [ruby-core:95596] [Ruby master Feature#16275] Revert `.:` syntax
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2019 23:11:25 +0000 (UTC)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <redmine.journal-82386.20191030231124.e5bc0e6b4f13d492@ruby-lang.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: redmine.issue-16275.20191023152613@ruby-lang.org

Issue #16275 has been updated by alanwu (Alan Wu).


`.:` has special power in that one cannot change its semantics by redefining a
method. It other words, it's a fundamental operation in the language like
`class << object` and `def object.method_name; end`. I think a fundamental
operation should only be introduced if there is a good supporting ecosystem for
it in the language.

I see reverting as a move to take a step back and do more design thinking about
functional programming and how it fits in with the rest of the language. With a
good ecosystem behind it, `.:` could be much more powerful than just a
shortcut.

On the other hand, keeping `.:` could be a way to crowd-source the design
process. @zverok already has some tickets that depend on `.:` for
expanding the FP part of Ruby. If `.:` hits a mainline release, more people
could come forward with ideas to gradually make `.:` less orphan and more
powerful. In the worst case scenario, no new paradigm is explored and we are
left with a syntactic sugar for an unpopular operation, I don't know if that is
an okay risk.

When it comes to primitive operations, less is more, so I think we should
revert for now.



----------------------------------------
Feature #16275: Revert `.:` syntax
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16275#change-82386

* Author: naruse (Yui NARUSE)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
`obj.:method` is introduced at r66667 by #12125 and #13581.
It encourages the functional programming style in Ruby.

But this shorthand syntax is just for methods of `self` without arguments.
It causes another feature requests like #16273 (and lambda compositions like #15428).

Such features will introduce a new view of Ruby but no one illustrates the whole picture yet.
I worried about such patch work may cause a conflict with future expansion of functional programing style or a just a garbage feature.

`.:` syntax is introduced in 2.7.0 preview1, not released in production yet.
How about reverting at this time and re-introduce with a big picture.



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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-10-30 23:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <redmine.issue-16275.20191023152613@ruby-lang.org>
2019-10-23 15:26 ` [ruby-core:95502] [Ruby master Feature#16275] Revert .: syntax naruse
2019-10-23 16:50 ` [ruby-core:95505] [Ruby master Feature#16275] Revert `.:` syntax nobu
2019-10-23 16:51 ` [ruby-core:95506] " nobu
2019-10-23 17:37 ` [ruby-core:95507] " shevegen
2019-10-23 18:04 ` [ruby-core:95510] " merch-redmine
2019-10-23 18:29 ` [ruby-core:95511] " daniel
2019-10-23 23:19 ` [ruby-core:95518] " mame
2019-10-24  1:33 ` [ruby-core:95521] " shannonskipper
2019-10-24  6:03 ` [ruby-core:95526] " zn
2019-10-24 11:26 ` [ruby-core:95531] " eregontp
2019-10-24 14:09 ` [ruby-core:95532] " daniel
2019-10-24 18:45 ` [ruby-core:95534] " manga.osyo
2019-10-25 14:42 ` [ruby-core:95547] " zverok.offline
2019-10-25 18:37 ` [ruby-core:95549] " daniel
2019-10-25 23:28 ` [ruby-core:95556] " tim
2019-10-26  2:44 ` [ruby-core:95558] " daniel
2019-10-26  7:02 ` [ruby-core:95560] " merch-redmine
2019-10-26  7:17 ` [ruby-core:95561] " nobu
2019-10-26 12:09 ` [ruby-core:95563] " shevegen
2019-10-29 11:05 ` [ruby-core:95580] " tim
2019-10-30 23:11 ` XrXr [this message]
2019-11-05 11:38 ` [ruby-core:95694] " maciej
2019-11-05 11:38 ` [ruby-core:95695] " maciej
2019-11-13  5:23 ` [ruby-core:95829] " zverok.offline
2019-11-13 11:15 ` [ruby-core:95840] " matz
2019-11-13 11:18 ` [ruby-core:95842] " 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-82386.20191030231124.e5bc0e6b4f13d492@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).