From: Yusuke ENDOH <mame@...>
Date: 2009-02-07T22:47:46+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:21907] Re: [Feature #1122] request for: Object#try

Hi,

2009/2/7 Narihiro Nakamura <redmine@ruby-lang.org>:
> Feature #1122: request for: Object#try
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/1122
>
> Author: Narihiro Nakamura
> Status: Open, Priority: Normal
>
> Hi.
>
> Object#try is new feature of rails2.3.
>
> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/2_3_release_notes.html
> http://github.com/rails/rails/blob/master/activesupport/lib/active_support/core_ext/try.rb
> http://ozmm.org/posts/try.html
>
> Matz said: "OK, good name is the last problem."
>
> Anyone has better name?


Interesting.  I think `try' is good enough for me as non-native.

But why does it take Object#send-like interface?
I dislike Object#send because complex modifications are needed:

  foo.bar(baz) -> foo.send(:bar, baz)

I have to type "send(:", move the cursor, delete "(", and type ", ".
What a pain!


Of course, it can't be helped in the case of Object#send.
But there is no reason for Object#try to follow it.
I prefer:

  foo.bar(baz) -> foo.try.bar(baz)

because it is much simpler (only to insert ".try")


For example:

  x = nil; p x.try + 1 #=> nil
  x = 100; p x.try + 1 #=> 101


Implementation image:

  class Object
    def try
      self
    end
  end

  class NilClass
    def try
      obj = BasicObject.new
      def obj.method_missing(*)
        nil
      end
      obj
    end
  end

-- 
Yusuke ENDOH <mame@tsg.ne.jp>