Comments on: A better “try()” for Ruby, why not do the Groovy way?

By: Urubatan

Urubatan — Mon, 19 May 2008 01:49:26 +0000

Arno, thinking about the other comments in this thread, I change my position, and I agree that playing with method_missing is not a good solution …
Even because Rails applications, and Ruby applications in general do not have a very complex object hierarchy.
By complex I mean, usually you do not go very deep in the object model to show an information.
I think this post was inspired by the java programmer inside my head

By: Arno Nyhm

Arno Nyhm — Sun, 18 May 2008 18:22:43 +0000

whats about a ? in as the first letter?

puts @person.?company.?name

By: Rajesh Duggal

Rajesh Duggal — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 21:22:25 +0000

http://andand.rubyforge.org/

By: trapdoor1 » Object.too_clever_by_half? rescue nil

trapdoor1 » Object.too_clever_by_half? rescue nil — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 13:08:26 +0000

[…] Monkey-patching proposals have abounded in the Ruby community recently - including, but not limited to Object#andand, Object#_? and SafeNil and Object#method_. […]

By: Juan Maiz Lulkin Flores da Cunha

Juan Maiz Lulkin Flores da Cunha — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 20:54:58 +0000

Me parece uma cópia do operador ? do Io …

http://www.iolanguage.com/scm/git/checkout/Io/docs/IoGuide.html

By: 프로그래밍 루비 » Blog Archive » 짧은 코드 한 줄이 주는 영감 - try() 놀이

프로그래밍 루비 » Blog Archive » 짧은 코드 한 줄이 주는 영감 - try() 놀이 — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 08:45:39 +0000

[…] 루비에서도 이 문법을 차용해오자는 의견도 있다. 구현은 method_missing을 이용해 처리해줄 수 있을 것 같다. 재미있는 […]

By: Urubatan

Urubatan — Wed, 12 Mar 2008 15:06:51 +0000

I think the captcha is already working
but if SK2 is working you’ll not see it again
Matt, I agree that the “?” termination would be more clear, but there is already a convention in ruby programming saying that methods terminated in “?” return a boolean value …

Renan, I use the WP-Syntax plugin

Arya, try_method_name is a good approach too, and it looks like calling a method (different of try(:method_name) ), the “_” having no meaning is a matter of convention, line the “?” at the end of boolean methods

Mark, I agree this is ugly, but I think try(:method_name) is uglier because it is not clear that you are calling a method (IMHO)

By: Rajesh Duggal

Rajesh Duggal — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:37:48 +0000

I’ve been doing…
@person && @person.name

It’s a little bit less typing than
@person.name unless @person.nil?

It gets really useful when you want to go deeper into an object..

e.g. id = @person && @person.friend && @person.friend.youngest && @person.friend.youngest.user && @person.friend.youngest.user.id

( Careful now.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Demeter )

Cheers,
Rajesh Duggal

By: Matt Todd

Matt Todd — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 05:47:11 +0000

By the by, your captcha image isn’t showing up…

By: Matt Todd

Matt Todd — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 05:45:09 +0000

Could just see if methodname[0..-2] exists, effectively allowing:

person?.name

The test could be written:

respond_to? :”#{methodname[0..-2]}” if methodname.split(”).last == ‘?’

Something like that… Come now, we can use the ‘?’ in our method names! Makes much more sense than ‘_’.