Implement Char#*(times) operator #3860
Conversation
| def *(times : Int) | ||
| raise ArgumentError.new "negative argument" if times < 0 | ||
|
|
||
| if times == 0 || bytesize == 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See my previous comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@RX14 I was still thinking of String, my bad - thanks for pointing that out! just fix-ed it ™
| # ``` | ||
| # '-' * 10 # => "----------" | ||
| # ``` | ||
| def *(times : Int) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Implementation is taken straight from String#*
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would prefer to change both here and at String#*
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I changed it in both, String#* and Char#* methods.
|
LGTM |
Sija
force-pushed
the
char-times-operator
branch
from
e15ba58
to
cae18ee
Compare
| # ``` | ||
| # '-' * 10 # => "----------" | ||
| # ``` | ||
| def *(times count : Int) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Sija why named arguments in an infix operator?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for joining late :-), but it's hard to imagine someone will write "aString".*(times=3).
I am ok with either name, but I see no point with the named argument in an infix operator.
Unless there is a reason I would drop that. Again any internal name is ok.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fair point, although I was thinking about the docs, where the argument name is shown.
| @@ -2149,19 +2149,19 @@ class String | |||
| # "Developers! " * 4 | |||
| # # => "Developers! Developers! Developers! Developers!" | |||
| # ``` | |||
| def *(times : Int) | |||
| raise ArgumentError.new "negative argument" if times < 0 | |||
| def *(times count : Int) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ditto.
And in this case, this change is just a param rename. I get the consistency, but, is there any reason to prefer times over count in both cases?
|
Sorry, I'll have to intervene and say no to this. What's the use case for this? Plus, doing Finally: 'a' + 1 # => b
'a' * 2 # => "aa"Doesn't make sense at all. Plus the code for multiplying a Char and String is almost identical, I wouldn't like to have that in the codebase. |
|
@asterite Fair 'nuff, I was thinking too about intermixing chars and integers which doesn't makes much sense. Also, we need to allocate |
Comes useful when in need to repeat just one
Charwithout reverting toString.