Feature #16799
Updated by jackmaple (maple jack) over 4 years ago
Classes are currently first-class citizens in Ruby, but functions are not.
This leads to a situation where the function calls are not uniform, for example:
``` ruby
def boo(x)
return x
end
boo2 = -> x { x }
a = boo 10
b = boo2.call(10)
or
b = boo2.(10)
or
b = boo2[10]
```
This is very confusing to people from other languages (JavaScript, Python, etc.), or people who are just starting to learn ruby.
If the method calling format can be unified, and the method is also a first-class citizen, then a higher-order function can be realized, and the method name is just a variable,so maybe more things can be done,and it might be better if the lambda is changed to the following form,for example(suppose):
``` ruby
method1 = (f,n) -> f(n)
or
method1 = (f,n) -> {
return f(n)
}
or
method1 = (f,n) -> do
return f(n)
end
#call method
result = method1(x -> x * 2,10) #result = 20
```
The same can also be achieved as follows:
``` ruby
def method1(f,n)
return f(n)
end
def double(x)
return x * 2
end
# &double is reference double method.
result = method1(&double,10) #result = 20
```
We can also use closures in methods(suppose):
``` ruby
def method1()
param = []
def method2(x)
param.push(x)
return param
end
return method2
end
f = method1
f(10)
```
Or you can implement decorators:
``` ruby
def decorator(f)
def child_method(*param)
puts(param)
return f(*param)
end
return child_method
end
def method1(x)
return x
end
#Here will cover the implementation of method1,include method1 method internal recursive reference.
#Because the method name is just a variable.
method1 = decorator(&method1)
method1(10)
```
Although the syntax change is not good, but it makes ruby easier to use.
These are just some of my thoughts, thanks.