Extend Array functionality with two 'include' methods.

[butcher]

This new functionality for Array instances. Two methods that help check inclusion two o more values. I think it will be very helpful for developers, because you can write your code shorter.

[fxn]

As a rule of thumb, the driver for AS core extensions is Rails itself. In that sense, AS core extensions have a different goal than other libraries like facets.

So albeit these and other extensions may be found to be useful for some in practice, they have to prove to be useful for the implementation of Rails generally speaking (unless they are clear winners for common idioms in web applications).

Do you think there are places in Rails where these extensions could be used?

[pixeltrix]

On a technical note you can pass the block to any? and all? and not create an intermediate array, e.g:

def include_all?(*args)
  args.all?{ |i| self.include?(i) }
end

def include_any?(*args)
  args.any?{ |i| self.include?(i) }
end

Also why only Array? The include? method is part of Enumerable so it should go there. However what @fxn said is correct.

[pixeltrix]

A quick grep across the Rails source code reveals only one instance where an any? or an all? contains an include? simple enough to use include_any? or include_all?.

[butcher]

@pixeltrix you are right about replacing this methods in Enumerable module.
You also right about passing blocks to any?
But I disagree with opinion about using methods. Some methods from time/calculation.rb never used in rails but very helpful for developers who works with Time in projects.
I think maybe this methods must be implemented in ruby core....

[fxn]

What's useful for most web applications most of the times is more debatable. And some existing extensions may be counterexamples.

But as I said it is a rule of thumb. A rule of thumb that helps keeping AS core extensions under control, otherwise AS would evolve into facets which is definitely not the goal.

There has been a lot of extensions that could be useful theoretically, but didn't fit in the criteria for being in AS. I believe this proposal falls here. Thanks for preparing the patch nonetheless.