"Useless syntax sugar": Numbered block parameters in Ruby

Comments

• AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Is ruby the new Perl?

  source

  • marcos@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That deserves an “always has been” meme… But IMO, Ruby outperled Perl since the beginning.

    Perl doesn’t let you redefine the syntax so that you can write the same program multiple ways. All it does is to encourage multiple programs to have the same meaning.

    source

    • AnUnusualRelic@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I never looked at Ruby, but that doesn’t seem like it would be great for readability (although maybe productivity).

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • exussum@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      And lets you easily write metal languages due to the way you can pass around blocks. Think configuration as code type stuff.

      source
• twelvefloatinghands@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Damn, I wish rust had that

  source

  • colonial@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It wouldn’t be as relevant, since passing a function or method instead of a closure is much easier in Rust - you can just name it, while Ruby requires you to use the method method.

    So instead of .map(|res| res.unwrap()) you can do .map(Result::unwrap) and it’ll Just Work™.

    source

    • jendrik@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Except when Type::Method takes a reference, then it doesn’t just work

      source
  • TheCee@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’m glad it doesnt.

    source
  • paperplane@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Swift does, though using the dollar sign rather than underscores

    source
  • Anders429@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I sincerely doubt Rust would ever add something like this.

    source
• eager_eagle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  The liberty to not name things that are obvious.

  and that’s yet another way to end up with hard to read code

  source

  • exussum@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    This makes me want to write a function for you to add to numbers where the variables are leftumber and rightnumber, instead of x and y.

    source
• Knusper@feddit.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I do think the unnumbered variant of such anonymous parameters is useful, if you’ve got a team of devs that knows not to misuse them.

  In particular, folks who are unexperienced will gladly make massive multi-line transformations, all in one step, and then continue blathering on about it or similar, as if everyone knew what they were talking about and there was no potential for ambiguity.

  This is also particularly annoying, because you rarely read code top-to-bottom. Ideally, you should be able to jump into the middle of any code and start reading, without having to figure out what the regional abbreviations or it mean.

  source
• jeffhykin@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Is it just me or does it feel kinda unclean for it to just support 1 through 9?

  source

  • eager_eagle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    tbf positional arguments are already bad enough. Now if you’re using over 9 positional args… just take a break, go for a short walk, and maybe you’ll come back with a better plan

    source
• bnjmn@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  OMG looks like Raku

  source