Add chunk_while #3579
Add chunk_while #3579
Conversation
| @@ -212,6 +212,12 @@ def slice_when(&block) | |||
| end | |||
| end | |||
|
|
|||
| def chunk_while(&block) | |||
| raise ArgumentError, "wrong number of arguments (0 for 1)" unless block_given? | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't strike me as a particularly accurate or helpful error message.
Even if it's the same as the one given by MRI, I'd prefer to see it made clear that a block is required. The current error message makes it look like a regular argument is required.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, interesting that this doesn't return an Enumerator when no block is given. I see this in the 2.3.0 ri chunk_while docs:
= .chunk_while
(from ruby core)
=== Implementation from Enumerable
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
enum.chunk_while {|elt_before, elt_after| bool } -> an_enumerator
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assuming this should raise an ArgumentError, I agree with @jemc here, we should use a more helpful error message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I see now why the block is required. So yeah, we should fix the error message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What should the error be? How about "Block required"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Or how about "no block given"? For consistency with chunk in https://github.com/rubinius/rubinius/blob/master/kernel/common/enumerable.rb#L8
|
Changed error message to "no block given". |
| def chunk_while(&block) | ||
| raise ArgumentError, "no block given" unless block_given? | ||
|
|
||
| slice_when { |before, after| !(block.call(before, after)) } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The explicit block isn't needed here, this can just be:
!(yield before, after)
|
Thanks! |
No description provided.