Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add a note: Separation of positional and keyword arguments in Ruby 3.0 #2293

Conversation

@mame
Copy link
Member

mame commented Dec 3, 2019

No description provided.

@mame mame requested a review from ruby/www-ruby-lang-org-editorial as a code owner Dec 3, 2019
Copy link
Member

sorah left a comment

Leaving some readability/grammar comments but note that I'm not a native speaker. You may apply the suggestions or may not.

@mame

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

mame commented Dec 3, 2019

@sorah Thank you very much for your review!

Copy link
Member

XrXr left a comment

Here are some suggestions for sentences that I found to be weird. I am also not a native speaker, so please take these suggestions with a grain of salt.

@eregon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

eregon commented Dec 6, 2019

The section about delegation looks good. However I would like to see some mention of when ruby2_keywords will be removed and what code can be used to work on 2.6 and after it's removed.

@jeremyevans

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

jeremyevans commented Dec 6, 2019

The section about delegation looks good. However I would like to see some mention of when ruby2_keywords will be removed and what code can be used to work on 2.6 and after it's removed.

I don't think there has been a decision on that. There is a tentative idea of after 2.6 EOL. At that point, we should not concern ourselves with 2.6 compatibility. We could say that when/if ruby2_keywords is removed in the future, you could switch to explicit keyword argument forwarding.

My personal opinion is that ruby2_keywords should stay until both of the following are true:

  • 2.6 is EOL.
  • Explicitly forwarding keyword arguments is not slower than using ruby2_keywords in CRuby.
@eregon

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

eregon commented Dec 12, 2019

We could say that when/if ruby2_keywords is removed in the future, you could switch to explicit keyword argument forwarding.

I would be fine with that.
But currently nothing is said and I feel it's dishonest to show a solution (ruby2_keywords), which therefore pretends it will stay forever when it's not been decided yet and likely will not stay forever.

I added a suggested change to mention that.

mame added a commit to mame/www.ruby-lang.org that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2019
@mame

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

mame commented Dec 13, 2019

Thank you for your review and comments! I really appreciate you all.

The commit log in this PR seems too long to make CI fail :-) I'll squash the commits, and merge it soon.

Even after this article is published, we can modify it with history.

@mame mame force-pushed the mame:separation-of-positional-and-keyword-arguments-in-ruby-3-0 branch from 432e451 to c57a5c3 Dec 13, 2019
@mame mame force-pushed the mame:separation-of-positional-and-keyword-arguments-in-ruby-3-0 branch from c57a5c3 to f079d22 Dec 13, 2019
@mame mame changed the title [WIP] Add a note: Separation of positional and keyword arguments in Ruby 3.0 Add a note: Separation of positional and keyword arguments in Ruby 3.0 Dec 13, 2019
@mame mame merged commit cb1ec95 into ruby:master Dec 13, 2019
3 checks passed
3 checks passed
build (2.6.3 / ubuntu-latest)
Details
build (2.6.3 / macos-latest)
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@mame mame deleted the mame:separation-of-positional-and-keyword-arguments-in-ruby-3-0 branch Dec 13, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.