[ruby-core:69305] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] [Open] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[ruby-core:69305] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] [Open] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[shevegen]

Issue #11167 has been reported by Robert A. Heiler.

----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

  if hash.has_key?
  if hash.key?
  if cat.is_hungry?

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class Cat instance, with
an instance variable called @is_hungry, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these @ivars through attr_* right now as is
already, such as:


    attr_reader :foo
    def foo; @foo; end

    attr_writer :foo
    def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

    attr_accessor :foo
    ^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  attr_query

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All attr_* that would end with a ? token, would be a 
combination of attr_reader and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

attr_reader :foo?

Would create both a method foo() and foo?().

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

attr_reader :foo

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through attr_query())

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!



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

[ruby-core:69308] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[nobu]

Issue #11167 has been updated by Nobuyoshi Nakada.

Description updated

----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-52573

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

[ruby-core:69318] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[matz]

Issue #11167 has been updated by Yukihiro Matsumoto.


Hi,

Is there any real-world use-case for the proposal?
It seems

  def foo?
    @foo
  end

is just fine.

Matz.


----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-52586

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

[ruby-core:69319] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[djberg96]

Issue #11167 has been updated by Daniel Berger.


Abandoned all hope:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/5796

https://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/135195



----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-52587

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

[ruby-core:69320] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[billk]

Issue #11167 has been updated by B Kelly.


Hi Matz,

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> Is there any real-world use-case for the proposal?

I've wanted this feature for years.  :)

Here's an example from code I'm working with today:

  def startup_complete?
    @startup_complete
  end

I would have preferred:

  attr_reader :startup_complete?


> It seems
> 
>   def foo?
>     @foo
>   end
> 
> is just fine.

Perhaps fine, but clunky.  :)

In other words, why do we ever use attr_reader (etc.) at all?

We use attr_.* because it's preferable to writing a bunch of
mini-functions.

The reasons are identical for the '?' variant.


Regards,

Bill



----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-52588

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

[ruby-core:69326] [Ruby trunk - Feature #11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[duerst]

Issue #11167 has been updated by Martin Dürst.


Daniel Berger wrote:
> Abandoned all hope:
> 
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/5796
> 
> https://www.ruby-forum.com/topic/135195

I think that this shows that there are several people who really like to use a foo? getter with a foo= setter. What it doesn't show that there are enough such people that it would balance out the confusion for those who think that a foo= setter goes together with a foo getter, at least by default.

With the current state, the main case is covered, nobody gets confused, and those who want a foo?/foo= pair can easily get it either as Matz showed above (easily reduced to one line) or by redefining the attr_... methods; the later is also very easy as it is usually about the first example given when explaining metaprogramming.

----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-52594

* Author: Robert A. Heiler
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

[ruby-core:96754] [Ruby master Feature#11167] Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as: def foo? returning @foo

[abaelter]

Issue #11167 has been updated by anders (Anders Bälter).


Like that!

sudo (Sudo Nice) wrote:
> How about implementing it similarly to Crystal?
> 
>     attr_accessor? :foo

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/5781#note-16

----------------------------------------
Feature #11167: Allow an attr_ variant for query-methods that end with a question mark '?' character, such as:  def foo?   returning @foo
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11167#change-83745

* Author: shevegen (Robert A. Heiler)
* Status: Rejected
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: 
* Target version: 
----------------------------------------
Hi guys,

Hi nobu :)

Also hi matz if matz reads this, and of course the rest of the core
team and everyone else.

Today on IRC, this mini-discussion happened (I show a snippet):

~~~
<apeiros> I really miss attr_query or whatever you want to name it
<apeiros> which would generate a ? method too
<jhass> apeiros: crystal has :P getter?
<apeiros> nice
~~~

Ok, so the language crystal has something ruby does not have.

We can't let those newcomers get away with making ruby look old
now can we!

I use ruby not crystal but I very often use methods that end 
with a '?' query mark in ruby. It helps me in simple if clauses
such as:

~~~ruby
if hash.has_key?
if hash.key?
if cat.is_hungry?
~~~

(In the latter, it might be a cat of class `Cat` instance, with
an instance variable called `@is_hungry`, and when the cat is 
fed with food, it is not hungry logically.)

We can generate these `@ivars` through `attr_`* right now as is
already, such as:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
def foo; @foo; end

attr_writer :foo
def foo=(i); @foo = i; end

attr_accessor :foo
^^^ Combines the above two methods into one.
~~~

But we have no way to designate methods that end via '?'.

I do not know which API call would be nice. apeiros on
IRC suggested  `attr_query`

I am fine with that. (The name is secondary for me, I
would like to have this feature available - what name 
it would then have is not the main issue for me.)

apeiros then also suggested this syntax:


All `attr_`* that would end with a `?` token, would be a 
combination of `attr_reader` and also a variant of the
above that has a '?' token, so for example:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo?
~~~

Would create both a method `foo()` and `foo?()`.

People who do not need this, can continue to use:

~~~ruby
attr_reader :foo
~~~

just fine.

So perhaps this suggestion is even better than
a new method (such as through `attr_query()`)

(I also have added one more line from apeiros,
not sure if I understood it, but I think the
above explanation should suffice - here is the
other suggestion he did:)

~~~
apeiros> e.g. attr_reader :foo? -> foo? // attr_accessor :foo? -> foo= + foo? // all with @foo of course. and foo? returning true/false.
~~~

Ok, that's it.

Thanks for reading!




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

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>