Issue #16446 has been updated by wishdev (John Higgins).
sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada) wrote:
> wishdev (John Higgins) wrote:
> >I prefer simpler examples
> > ary = [-1, 0, 1]
>
> My intention of including two `0`s in the example was to show that there remains an asymmmetry; the search is done from the left, not from the right. In principle, we can still extend the paradigm, but I am not asking for that.
Nothing wrong with that at all - but I think adding a :reverse options to the methods would accomplish a right to left search feature.
As I said - declaring what you want to do as opposed to trying to come up with some group of 2 words descriptions seems the wiser path. Especially looking at concepts like reversing the search direction.........
----------------------------------------
Feature #16446: Enumerable#take_*, Enumerable#drop_* counterparts with positive conditions
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16446#change-83367
* Author: sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee:
* Target version:
----------------------------------------
#16441 led me to think about the issue more generally. When we want to split a series of iterations by the first element that satisfies (or dissatisfies) a condition, we have three factors to consider.
(1) Whether we want the condition to work **negatively** or **positively**
(2) Whether we want the first element to satisfy (or dissatisfy) the condition to be included in the **left** side or the **right** side of the split
(3) Whether we want the **left** side or the **right** side in the returned output
This leads us to eight possible combinations to consider.
```ruby
enum = [1, 1, 0, 3, 3, 0, 5, 5].to_enum
```
| |(1)|(2)|(3)|method|example|
|--|--|--|--|--|--|
|1|negatively|left|left|`take_while`|`enum.foo1(&:nonzero?) # => [1, 1]`|
|2|negatively|left|right|`drop_while`|`enum.foo2(&:nonzero?) # => [0, 3, 3, 0, 5, 5]`|
|3|negatively|right|left||`enum.foo3(&:nonzero?) # => [1, 1, 0]`|
|4|negatively|right|right||`enum.foo4(&:nonzero?) # => [3, 3, 0, 5, 5]`|
|5|positively|left|left||`enum.foo5(&:zero?) # => [1, 1]`|
|6|positively|left|right||`enum.foo6(&:zero?) # => [0, 3, 3, 0, 5, 5]`|
|7|positively|right|left||`enum.foo7(&:zero?) # => [1, 1, 0]`|
|8|positively|right|right||`enum.foo8(&:zero?) # => [3, 3, 0, 5, 5]`|
Proposal #16441 asks for a method that corresponds to case 3 in the table above, but I think that would make the paradigm messy unless case 4 is also implemented. Either cases 3 and 4 should both be implemented, or both not. Actually, the current proposal is not about cases 3 and 4. I would leave that to #16641.
In many use cases (including the first example in #16641), we want to detect the "marker element" by which we split the iterations. In the cases above, that can be the element `0`. In such use cases, it is more natural to describe the condition in positive terms (i.e., `zero?`) rather than negative terms (i.e., `nonzero?`). (And in other use cases, it might be the other way around.) So I would like to propose methods that correspond to cases 5, 6, 7, 8 above.
Naming of the methods should be done systematically. As a candidate, I came up with the following:
||method|
|--|--|
|5|`take_before`|
|6|`drop_before`|
|7|`take_upto`|
|8|`drop_upto`|
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.