From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on starla X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from nue.mailmanlists.eu (nue.mailmanlists.eu [94.130.110.93]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C56231F4CC for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2024 05:36:56 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ml.ruby-lang.org header.i=@ml.ruby-lang.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mail header.b=rircEUdB; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ruby-lang.org header.i=@ruby-lang.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=s1 header.b=D4ii2CZH; dkim-atps=neutral DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ml.ruby-lang.org; s=mail; t=1733722613; bh=AXNSOjHjRELETiTtFz8vLD0sHeCMc9Rrto3hWxuffW8=; h=Date:References:To:Reply-To:Subject:List-Id:List-Archive: List-Help:List-Owner:List-Post:List-Subscribe:List-Unsubscribe: From:Cc:From; b=rircEUdBqCN6OgDimAOLw8+N/QmqkOLlTC4964/vWDSHy4rmgiEHJpdGYDb/jcZjO 2ntgR4/sqE2oF21T4bo72s5SGMZGU2cXEMxDSsaSFIH+SDv4emxAkdUeMegaAhsxCw +0CfTAA8wP/LWOcSib5Mmwtrk9jtJ4+TygUkk9Wc= Received: from nue.mailmanlists.eu (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by nue.mailmanlists.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9248E44D95 for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2024 05:36:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: nue.mailmanlists.eu; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ruby-lang.org header.i=@ruby-lang.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=s1 header.b=D4ii2CZH; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from s.wrqvwxzv.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net (s.wrqvwxzv.outbound-mail.sendgrid.net [149.72.154.232]) by nue.mailmanlists.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01E3144D3F for ; Mon, 9 Dec 2024 05:36:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ruby-lang.org; h=from:references:subject:mime-version:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:list-id:to:cc:content-type:from:subject:to; s=s1; bh=+o0i/K9VoRLcDys3/EjOJEcGADNDUmcF2Rjcztsth4U=; b=D4ii2CZHec1NyP1bKz1t3PAW55AXzbdUIygSZBt4Rh8ODBwhc8mSAR5AvOA5TGZKyXve iu0FmQTH62ZWjnEOxPXSpCcI9E8RxyYnRlScbh8X/ZYw+J2l1WxPEuYJjgdlOZDaAg+qIk LWb0IcTShTEo9aOuxK+rwkLUz8lY5semjT7MnoagPNDLUV7+MYCt97tgQxOAsTgAjrvwah nRi0JibCzT00s+aZxMH4CsTqII1ufBDLVh69+8J43d9y/J3vSDyRQs5KnyXA5lojRYsb7m MNgbX6Z9KSsw0p3txKPxe623ggoimnHUSyWXk2Md3zDesK+Fs0ZIvHQc8f0CeHQg== Received: by recvd-5f54b5d587-xv4qq with SMTP id recvd-5f54b5d587-xv4qq-1-675681E8-3 2024-12-09 05:36:40.504785095 +0000 UTC m=+2103295.671325280 Received: from herokuapp.com (unknown) by geopod-ismtpd-31 (SG) with ESMTP id n5jHv5JOQ02n3x2voaHMfg for ; Mon, 09 Dec 2024 05:36:40.441 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2024 05:36:40 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Redmine-Project: ruby-master X-Redmine-Issue-Tracker: Feature X-Redmine-Issue-Id: 20925 X-Redmine-Issue-Author: Dan0042 X-Redmine-Issue-Priority: Normal X-Redmine-Sender: mame X-Mailer: Redmine X-Redmine-Host: bugs.ruby-lang.org X-Redmine-Site: Ruby Issue Tracking System X-Auto-Response-Suppress: All Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Redmine-MailingListIntegration-Message-Ids: 96813 X-SG-EID: =?us-ascii?Q?u001=2Ep+ckLDtT+4Y5c+H0YCkEnsuWiCQmn3OZA=2F9FzjoR6ZZlPaMv54M7EFoSM?= =?us-ascii?Q?CX5Trc79ep2R5F+0oYS4n23jq1cv=2FEliEkHlvbb?= =?us-ascii?Q?6hCMIkNZBh74SBvhqGjSaf1Iy+ru9P8LjzWwVUA?= =?us-ascii?Q?r7yM3ffUr2ccTBc+zkpF8FqF6wbb+FBDAcWayfA?= =?us-ascii?Q?XtCH5WQdACYsrnhaiioF8dC5jEnh8prdFY8Pu46?= =?us-ascii?Q?Ng=2F4zk2ZVY80Ek+iG7p3nmFPmM4mcH9dbJnyHrc?= =?us-ascii?Q?v6im?= To: ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org X-Entity-ID: u001.I8uzylDtAfgbeCOeLBYDww== Message-ID-Hash: X3UBZIQEQN2S6ZEE5O2DJSAHVA7OIFWJ X-Message-ID-Hash: X3UBZIQEQN2S6ZEE5O2DJSAHVA7OIFWJ X-MailFrom: bounces+313651-b711-ruby-core=ml.ruby-lang.org@em5188.ruby-lang.org X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9 Precedence: list Reply-To: Ruby developers Subject: [ruby-core:120136] [Ruby master Feature#20925] Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line List-Id: Ruby developers Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: From: "mame (Yusuke Endoh) via ruby-core" Cc: "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Issue #20925 has been updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh). As a developer involved in the implementation of Ruby grammar, I am not a fan in this extension, but as a Ruby programmer, I understand you want to write that. I might want to write it with the following indentation anyway. ``` if request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? request.encrypted_cookie end ``` ---------------------------------------- Feature #20925: Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20925#change-110885 * Author: Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I would like for this to become accepted syntax: condition1 || condition2 condition1 && condition2 condition1 or condition2 condition1 and condition2 This is similar to how method chaining on the second line was added in Ruby 1.9 expr .method And it has the same advantage: when you have a multi-line expression, instead of hunting for the dot or boolean operator at the end of line1, it's right there at the beginning of line2, making the structure very obvious and readable. Please contrast: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption The first expression must rely on indentation to communicate the multi-line nature of the condition, and even then it's not as immediately obvious as the second expression, where we can see easily and immediately that this is a multi-line `&&` condition. This syntax is also similar to how a trailing comma is allowed in arrays and hashes (and method calls since Ruby 1.9), with the same advantage. It makes for a cleaner diff when you add an element to the array/hash/conditional. Taking the previous example, imagine we are adding the condition `&& request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption`. Now contrast the diff between the two styles: request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && - request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? && + request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption request.secret_key_base.present? && request.encrypted_signed_cookie_salt.present? && request.encrypted_cookie_salt.present? + && request.use_authenticated_cookie_encryption Based on the above I would say this syntax is natural and consistent with existing Ruby syntactical elements, and would greatly improve code readability. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ ______________________________________________ ruby-core mailing list -- ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-core-leave@ml.ruby-lang.org ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/