Description
Eregon (Benoit Daloze) wrote in https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/12737#note-15:
Refinement#refined_class
is a bit strange given it can return a module.
How about addingRefinement#refined_module
as an alias for clarity?
I'm for it. What do you think, Matz?
I am not 100% satisfied. Probably (unlike class_eval
and module_eval
whose class/module distinction is for the receiver), the method returns a class or a module, unrelated to the name.
Is there any idea?
Matz.
matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote in #note-2:
I am not 100% satisfied. Probably (unlike
class_eval
andmodule_eval
whose class/module distinction is for the receiver), the method returns a class or a module, unrelated to the name.
Is there any idea?
#refined_target
#refined_subject
#refined_receiver
#refined_context
The first one I came up with is #refined_subject
in the same sense as #subject
in RSpec: http://rspec.info/features/3-12/rspec-core/subject/explicit-subject/
Among those proposed names, target
and subject
are acceptable. I am not sure refined_
prefix required or not, as not being English native.
Maybe should we admit the design mistake and make refined_class
obsolete?
Matz.
matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto) wrote in #note-4:
Among those proposed names,
target
andsubject
are acceptable. I am not surerefined_
prefix required or not, as not being English native.
Maybe should we admit the design mistake and makerefined_class
obsolete?
I prefer target
and agree to making refined_class
obsolete.
Make obsolete = deprecate it, right? (sounds OK)
Refinement#target
sounds good to me.
Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0 Like0
Loading...
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.3