Prev: binary encode 7 ([7].pack("C")) as "\007" instead of "\a"
Next: leak tracking x64
From: Rick DeNatale on 1 Aug 2010 12:49
On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:45 PM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> def all!?(&block)
>>  !empty? && all?(&block)
>> end
>
> No that doesn't make sense to me all not?  Not at all!
>
> All not what?

And right after I hit send, I realized that I'd probably expect
semantics more like:

#def all!?
def all_not?
if block_given?
all? {|element| ! yield element}
else
all? {|element| ! element}
end
end



--
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Github: http://github.com/rubyredrick
Twitter: @RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

From: Hal Fulton on 1 Aug 2010 13:24
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Maurizio De Santis
> <desantis.maurizio(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > Josh Cheek wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Rick DeNatale
> >> <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> [].all? {|element| element != 3 } # => true
> >>> There may be a better name than non_vacuous_all? but I can't think of
> one.
> >>>
> >>>
> >> How about #appall? to imply that it is a pessimistic implementation of
> >> #all?
> >> :)
>

Ho

From: Hal Fulton on 1 Aug 2010 13:25
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Hal Fulton <rubyhacker(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Maurizio De Santis
>> <desantis.maurizio(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Josh Cheek wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Rick DeNatale
>> >> <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> [].all? {|element| element != 3 } # => true
>> >>> There may be a better name than non_vacuous_all? but I can't think of
>> one.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> How about #appall? to imply that it is a pessimistic implementation of
>> >> #all?
>> >> :)
>>
>
>
Sorry, hit send by accident.

How about 'every?' for the non-vacuous 'all?'?

If we really need one, that is.

Hal

From: David A. Black on 1 Aug 2010 13:48
Hi --

On Mon, 2 Aug 2010, Hal Fulton wrote:

> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:24 PM, Hal Fulton <rubyhacker(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 12:28 PM, Maurizio De Santis
>>> <desantis.maurizio(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Josh Cheek wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Rick DeNatale
>>>>> <rick.denatale(a)gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> [].all? {|element| element != 3 } # => true
>>>>>> There may be a better name than non_vacuous_all? but I can't think of
>>> one.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> How about #appall? to imply that it is a pessimistic implementation of
>>>>> #all?
>>>>> :)
>>>
>>
>>
> Sorry, hit send by accident.
>
> How about 'every?' for the non-vacuous 'all?'?
>
> If we really need one, that is.

Or maybe "all?!" :-)


David

--
David A. Black, Senior Developer, Cyrus Innovation Inc.

The Ruby training with Black/Brown/McAnally
Compleat Philadelphia, PA, October 1-2, 2010
Rubyist http://www.compleatrubyist.com

From: Maurizio De Santis on 2 Aug 2010 17:02
what about "all_and_not_empty" ?
or maybe: "all_and_when_I_say_all_I_say_all!" :D
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: binary encode 7 ([7].pack("C")) as "\007" instead of "\a"
Next: leak tracking x64