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=0.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 8FDD21F4CC for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 14:22:17 +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=CNzpBjm7; 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=FNQ949t9; dkim-atps=neutral DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ml.ruby-lang.org; s=mail; t=1736432503; bh=BSJ5zJ4cuzjEf/gEUdm/GULlOcRSguJGwHiggQ/TDMc=; 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=CNzpBjm74wapNDex9mlHiIAaU/lX2zfrmii57+GfHwpdjSue8i6z9xSS6fnsBjJzZ Itb3Pg1/FS1vF0JYplMMw3RPDXX4HfqzFYOzPS7oBcFnXRRLaeX5tyXqHU6jjLHkNP 64z/sIBpvNw2tl4gy2Bbn8FktiEFnMChuBpQWEfo= Received: from nue.mailmanlists.eu (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by nue.mailmanlists.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B72467D0 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 14:21:43 +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=FNQ949t9; 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 29AAA44A4B for ; Thu, 9 Jan 2025 14:21:36 +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=7sWE33s8HkENXZ/jFYtWxxrzgFnLRr1UkZle8p5dfcw=; b=FNQ949t9CQbU6wI2CZV9L5wa9PKImzgBzBIKhOCSLtxB8s9U8CLpKpYLkViSS57A7jkE 6FHqavKjcpHn9Iy8fQx2da3zwR5LiRMbGl03Z96+fQgVmjzs3FcEhozlzxqjxoA91fwFHV kfprwtiklR/CLe/OwVBzggASvVBKw0r80AiA1rJoPgoYrp6t44Mu6lX65FpEMw8VnvQYYN rfjkClwWW/8t7tBAopIhvtck/zh0jRwD4kewJpj2y3KcldIaJT/Sq3glujIT9RBeHFGmmG 0ToyS8jdyVTLjww1KEhDO98Ps/CP76+IPau2/GeHegPhfzHmMC2YxlvKl5Ghc5/g== Received: by recvd-84b546689d-7lhwp with SMTP id recvd-84b546689d-7lhwp-1-677FDB6F-B 2025-01-09 14:21:35.387236436 +0000 UTC m=+4813127.794220814 Received: from herokuapp.com (unknown) by geopod-ismtpd-16 (SG) with ESMTP id mFU44rG8SoOY0eF7Aays0A for ; Thu, 09 Jan 2025 14:21:35.322 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2025 14:21:35 +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: Dan0042 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: 97259 X-SG-EID: =?us-ascii?Q?u001=2EHy4LB1bizMxDg=2Fk6r7dYDS9qUDe3jZN8DIPm4OS+F86l7XdLFEAVX=2F2lh?= =?us-ascii?Q?z0Jj=2Ft7J6DgKnq5Qaf6Ba4+egck=2FoKuUHMa9Cn6?= =?us-ascii?Q?7D+EQ8vUJVstNbV5JAhGA0T7xmIaJ93bgyiKT7Z?= =?us-ascii?Q?D4sTnKuDnkztvPJBfHH0Q=2F1ndsqs6Nwe3G0cQic?= =?us-ascii?Q?lxR9XxgXzb1XPsM+wGFMs8fRR6OpmEHHA+H5aHV?= =?us-ascii?Q?zxDveB1jlu95edm0wVo=2Ft6dj+MSzrwDhw=2F94d73?= =?us-ascii?Q?mn5jLuo2FNxV4qs5ko=2FLZc9Y9Q=3D=3D?= To: ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org X-Entity-ID: u001.I8uzylDtAfgbeCOeLBYDww== Message-ID-Hash: UQWULV3HKK2GZZUGRN3HNJ7BX2MBM4Q4 X-Message-ID-Hash: UQWULV3HKK2GZZUGRN3HNJ7BX2MBM4Q4 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:120575] [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: "Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) via ruby-core" Cc: "Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme)" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Issue #20925 has been updated by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme). It's the same thing for method calls right? ```ruby a = 1 .to_s ``` It changes the RHS of assignment to `1.to_s` A boolean operators on the second line is consistent with that so I don't see a problem, since there's no backward incompatibility. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20925: Allow boolean operators at beginning of line to continue previous line https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20925#change-111402 * 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/