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

Remove singular names like Int#day, Int#month, etc. #6273

Conversation

asterite
Copy link
Member

It seems in #5093 (comment) it was decided to remove these aliases. At that time they were marked as :nodoc:, not sure why, but it's better to remove them as soon as possible.

@asterite asterite force-pushed the refactor/remove-time-span-nodoc-methods branch from c138f43 to 9448705 Compare June 26, 2018 11:55
@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

@RX14 what's wrong?

@asterite asterite force-pushed the refactor/remove-time-span-nodoc-methods branch from 9448705 to 016e9d3 Compare June 26, 2018 12:03
@Sija
Copy link
Contributor

Sija commented Jun 26, 2018

Where was it decided? It was just @oprypin stating his PoV...

@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

@Sija His PR was approved, which means it was agreed to take that direction. Otherwise it wouldn't have been approved. I'm just following the flow here.

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor

Sija commented Jun 26, 2018

His PR was unrelated and the mentioned comment I'd call a musings on the subject.

@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

Well, they are aliases, and we don't like aliases, so...

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor

Sija commented Jun 26, 2018

Yeah, and we shouldn't like obsession too. Wouldn't you like to tackle something that actually matters, instead of nit-picking some random would-be issues?

I'm against aliases too but in this case IMO they help more in natural code writing than not.

@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

Wouldn't you like to tackle something that actually matters, instead of nit-picking some random would-be issues?

Like what?

Also, I'm not seeing your PRs tackling things that matter 😅

I'm against aliases too but in this case IMO they help more in natural code writing than not

I agree. If that's the case, someone please send a PR to remove those :nodoc: comments (and also add microsecond, because in my PR I didn't include that).

@hugoabonizio
Copy link
Contributor

Let's calm down guys. Remember: MINSWAN. Please keep the discussion about arguments and not attacking each other.

❤️

@ysbaddaden
Copy link
Contributor

ysbaddaden commented Jun 26, 2018

The only reason the aliases exist is because we say 1.day not 1.days; yet, that argument could apply for .includes_to? or responds_to?, with for example posts.include?(post) but collection.includes?(item).

Either we allow all these aliases, so source code reads better, or we disallow all aliases and keep a single form, which is more consistent. I'm fine with either.

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor

Sija commented Jun 26, 2018

Like what?

Like single-msqueue branch for instance.

Also, I'm not seeing your PRs tackling things that matter 😅

Fair 'nuff 😅 Take my apologies if you felt offended, that wasn't my intention.

@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

Oh, but that's too hard to implement and I don't have the knowledge nor the time (also remember I don't get any of the money from bountysource, so Im doing this just for fun, just like you all).

And sorry too, my reply came a bit harsh.

@asterite asterite closed this Jun 27, 2018
@j8r
Copy link
Contributor

j8r commented Jun 27, 2018

Why closing @asterite ?

@asterite
Copy link
Member Author

Because it's not decided what to do, and discussing things in a PR is not the way to do it.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants