From: Tom Wardrop <tom@...>
Date: 2011-08-15T11:59:34+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:38957] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4801] Shorthand Hash Syntax for Strings


Issue #4801 has been updated by Tom Wardrop.


So basically what I proposed in my previous message, is to some extent, get rid of Symbols. You'd still have the :symbol syntax, and symbols would still be handled differently by the garbage collector (as they currently are), but they would otherwise be a literal named string, like a shorthand for mystring = 'mystring'.

Going back to the original feature suggestion regarding this hash synax: {'key': 'value'}, with my proposal it wouldn't matter whether 'key' was a symbol or a string. The decision would come down to what makes the most sense in terms of memory and the garbage collector.

Side note: I was meant to add to my previous message that maybe Symbol should sub-class String if my proposal were to be implemented?
----------------------------------------
Feature #4801: Shorthand Hash Syntax for Strings
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/4801

Author: Tom Wardrop
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


Assuming there's no technical limitation or ambiguities, I suggest that the shorthand syntax for symbol's in the context of an array, be applied to strings also.

E.g. {'key': 'value'}

I don't believe there are any syntax ambiguous that this would give rise to. The only consideration that may need to be made, is if there are plans to support shorthand syntax for quoted symbols, e.g. {'key': 'value'}. If quoted symbols are off the table, then there's no harm in implementing a shorthand hash syntax for strings. This may stem the growing problem of what I like to call 'symbolitis' , where symbol's are selected as the key type purely for their aesthetics and ease of use, even when strings are a more appropriate choice.

Thoughts?


-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org