Fix Enumerator::Lazy#with_index #2742
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
* Make it correctly handle lambdas * Make it iterate over the block if block is given The original implementation was flawed, based on lazy_set_method instead of lazy_add_method. Note that there is no implicit map when passing a block, the return value of the block passed to with_index is ignored, just as it is for Enumerator#with_index. Also like Enumerator#with_index, when called with a block, the return value is an enumerator without the index. Fixes [Bug #16414]
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The original implementation was flawed, based on lazy_set_method
instead of lazy_add_method.
Note that there is no implicit map when passing a block, the return
value of the block passed to with_index is ignored, just as it
is for Enumerator#with_index. Also like Enumerator#with_index,
when called with a block, the return value is an enumerator without
the index.
Fixes [Bug #16414]