Ruby doesn't implement x++ for Fixnum's because ???
in [Ruby]
|
Prev: Thread error "undefined method `keys' for nil:NilClass"
Next: Getting version from PE executables
From: Aldric Giacomoni on 9 Nov 2009 14:48 Rick Denatale wrote: > Just so you know I wasn't dissing La langue belle. I try to maintain > a basic fluency. Not sure if my French or my C is more rusty! <G> > Hah! No worries, I wasn't insulted. So .. Friend++ ? Warning: incrementing a constant! -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
From: Rick DeNatale on 9 Nov 2009 17:57 On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 2:48 PM, Aldric Giacomoni <aldric(a)trevoke.net> wrote: > Rick Denatale wrote: >> Just so you know I wasn't dissing La langue belle. I try to maintain >> a basic fluency. Not sure if my French or my C is more rusty! <G> >> > > Hah! No worries, I wasn't insulted. > So .. Friend++ ? Bien sur -- Rick DeNatale Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale
From: Joshua Ballanco on 10 Nov 2009 00:42 On Nov 9, 2009, at 6:35 AM, Seebs wrote: > On 2009-11-09, Marnen Laibow-Koser <marnen(a)marnen.org> wrote: >> Would you? Or would you rather see >> count = blahblahblah.count do |args| >> lots_of_stuff >> condition >> end > > Huh! That is prettier. Didn't know it existed. > > But in general, basically, any place where we have a += 1, I'd prefer ++. > > And I am pretty sure that +=1 is occasionally useful. ...and *this* is where, in the long long history of this thread, where I finally realized the *real* issue here. Let's take Rails... rails, activerecord, activeresource, actionpack, actionmailer, and activesupport... 106,518 lines of Ruby code 66 instances of foo += 1 (or foo += 100) That's 0.06% of the lines of code! If you're writing Ruby code and your fraction is higher, chances are you're "doing it wrong". Cheers, Josh
From: t3ch.dude on 10 Nov 2009 14:59 On Nov 7, 4:39 am, "David A. Black" <dbl...(a)rubypal.com> wrote: > Hi -- > > > > On Sat, 7 Nov 2009, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: > > Michael W. Ryder wrote: > > [...] > >> . I much prefer the > >> simplicity of Basic and C with for loops that can go either direction. > > > That's because you're trying to write C in Ruby. There are far more > > idiomatic ways of doing things -- and they *are* clearer, at least in a > > Ruby context. > > >> As far as going backwards I use it a lot to parse strings of the form > >> "cityname ST 12345-6789" toCity,State, andZipCode fields. I look > >> for the first blank from the end of the string and assume everything > >> after it is theZipCode, I then find the next two non-blank characters > >> and assign them toState, and everything else is theCityname. > > > That's great in a language like C that doesn't have very good string > > handling. The Ruby way to do this would be > >city,state,zip= string.split(/\s+/) irb(main):004:0> str = "Washington Court House OH 43160" => "Washington Court House OH 43160" irb(main):005:0> zip, state, city = str.reverse.split(/ /,3).map {|e| e.reverse} => ["43160", "OH", "Washington Court House"] > > You'd need to take multi-wordcitynames into account, though. So > maybe: > > city,state,zip= /\A(.*)\s+(\S+)\s+(\S+)\Z/.match(str).captures > > David >
From: Michael W. Ryder on 10 Nov 2009 15:55
Joshua Ballanco wrote: > On Nov 9, 2009, at 6:35 AM, Seebs wrote: > >> On 2009-11-09, Marnen Laibow-Koser <marnen(a)marnen.org> wrote: >>> Would you? Or would you rather see >>> count = blahblahblah.count do |args| >>> lots_of_stuff >>> condition >>> end >> Huh! That is prettier. Didn't know it existed. >> >> But in general, basically, any place where we have a += 1, I'd prefer ++. >> >> And I am pretty sure that +=1 is occasionally useful. > > ..and *this* is where, in the long long history of this thread, where I finally realized the *real* issue here. > > Let's take Rails... rails, activerecord, activeresource, actionpack, actionmailer, and activesupport... > > 106,518 lines of Ruby code > > 66 instances of foo += 1 (or foo += 100) > > That's 0.06% of the lines of code! If you're writing Ruby code and your fraction is higher, chances are you're "doing it wrong". > Or your style of programming is different than the programmer(s) in the code you researched. As an example earlier in the thread I showed one way to separate the city, state, and zip code from a string, at least two other authors showed totally different methods. They all returned the same results so which one was right? One used regular expressions and the other used split and map. x = x + 1 returns the same result as x += 1 but is probably easier for some people to understand quickly. > Cheers, > > Josh |