Re: Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!goblin1!goblin.stu.neva.ru!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.ruby
Subject	Re: Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern
Date	Wed, 30 Jul 2014 19:45:24 +0200
Lines	31
Message-ID	<c3sp9mF41umU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<fedb7003-f5e4-457b-9120-1ad937a9eedc@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	individual.net JeJDQjIiJkPQmezVZVxgrAkg7xtm+/RmuPwcPEofJwUL2seGc=
Cancel-Lock	sha1:O9wR1aVon1jQwDYqyFghlY/OO2Q=
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0
In-Reply-To	<fedb7003-f5e4-457b-9120-1ad937a9eedc@googlegroups.com>
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.ruby:7007

Show key headers only | View raw

On 29.07.2014 18:40, Eugene Gilburg wrote:
> Below pattern is very popular in Ruby, but does not work if the
> method returns `nil` or `false`:
>
> @obj ||= some_expensive_method()
>
> For more consistent and efficient use of this pattern, you'd have to
> write:
>
> if defined?(@obj) @obj else @obj = some_expensive_method() end
>
> Because above syntax is clunky, people tend not to use it, with the
> less efficient ||= being far more common.

Where is this less efficient?  I don't think it is.

> So what do you think of `?=` syntax below, to exactly replicate the
> above code block? It should check not value of variable but only
> whether the variable itself is defined:
>
> @obj ?= some_expensive_method()

Operator ||= works remarkably good in practice and for the rare cases 
where #some_expensive_method returns nil or false the user can use the 
test with #defined? explicitly.  Not sure whether that small benefit 
warrants a language change.

Kind regards

	robert

Back to comp.lang.ruby | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar

Thread

Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern Eugene Gilburg <eugene.gilburg@gmail.com> - 2014-07-29 09:40 -0700
  Re: Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern Eugene Gilburg <eugene.gilburg@gmail.com> - 2014-07-29 09:44 -0700
    Re: Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-07-30 19:41 +0200
  Re: Proposal for easier syntax for define-unless-already-defined pattern Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2014-07-30 19:45 +0200

csiph-web