Hash insertion order preservation in ruby1.9

I am glad to see that ruby1.9.0 preserves hash insertion order.
It will finally allow me to generate human-readable yaml dumps
without ugly workarounds.

Some questions:

(1) Can I rely upon hash insertion order preservation as an approved
new feature of Ruby, without any risk that it may get lost again in
future releases ?

(2) ri1.9 says:
“The order in which you traverse a hash by either key or value
may seem arbitrary, and will generally not be in the insertion order.”
Do I understand correctly that this text is outdated ?

If the answer is two times yes, then read on, please:

(3) Would you agree that the almost undocumented yaml/omap
class is obsolete ? Maybe, one should clearly marked it as such,
or even exclude it from 1.9 ??

(4) Once hashes are ordered, new use cases will be found, and
new methods will become useful. I would like to propose the following
new instance methods
Hash#insert_before( existing_key, other_hash )
Hash#insert_after( existing_key, other_hash )
and possibly also
Hash#insert_before( existing_key, key, value )
Hash#insert_after( existing_key, key, value )
to insert new items at well defined locations. My use case, as I
said before, is a hash which is dumped into human-readable yaml.

Regards, Joachim

I think that you should ask on ruby-core list.


Rados³aw Bu³at

http://radarek.jogger.pl - mój blog

2008/3/31 Rados³aw Bu³at [email protected]:

I think that you should ask on ruby-core list.
yes but with cross posting please I believe that this of common
interest on this list given its history.

Robert


Rados³aw Bu³at

http://radarek.jogger.pl - mój blog


http://ruby-smalltalk.blogspot.com/


Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

Hi,

In message “Re: Hash insertion order preservation in ruby1.9”
on Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:55:12 +0900, Joachim (München) [email protected]
writes:

|I am glad to see that ruby1.9.0 preserves hash insertion order.
|It will finally allow me to generate human-readable yaml dumps
|without ugly workarounds.
|
|Some questions:
|
|(1) Can I rely upon hash insertion order preservation as an approved
|new feature of Ruby, without any risk that it may get lost again in
|future releases ?

For CRuby, yes. For Ruby the language, we have to make up consensus
with other implementations.

          matz.

Cool! I’ve seen folks trip themselves up on this using 1.8.6 before
because of an assumption in their mental model of the language. Nice
to see this addressed.

Sent from my iPhone

On Tue, 1 Apr 2008 06:18:51 +0900, Yukihiro M.
[email protected] wrote:

|(1) Can I rely upon hash insertion order preservation as an approved
|new feature of Ruby, without any risk that it may get lost again in
|future releases ?

For CRuby, yes. For Ruby the language, we have to make up consensus
with other implementations.

I think it is safe to say it will remain in JRuby as well. The new
behavior has allowed us to optimize hash iteration since it is now
entirely deterministic.

-mental

On 2 Apr., 03:39, Nobuyoshi N. [email protected] wrote:

and possibly also
Hash#insert_before( existing_key, key, value )
Hash#insert_after( existing_key, key, value )
to insert new items at well defined locations. My use case, as I
said before, is a hash which is dumped into human-readable yaml.

What do you expect on conflicts?


Nobu Nakada

Sorry Nobu, I saw your question only today.

I see two possible conflicts:

  • existing _key does not exist
  • key already exists
    Right?

I would raise an exception in both cases.

Rationale:
One could imagine several other ways to resolve conflicts.
I do not think one of them will be widely accepted as the obvious
right thing to do.
Therefore not attempting to reconcile conflicts will cause the least
surprise.

Regards, Joachim

Hi,

At Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:55:12 +0900,
Joachim (München) wrote in [ruby-talk:296442]:

(4) Once hashes are ordered, new use cases will be found, and
new methods will become useful. I would like to propose the following
new instance methods
Hash#insert_before( existing_key, other_hash )
Hash#insert_after( existing_key, other_hash )
and possibly also
Hash#insert_before( existing_key, key, value )
Hash#insert_after( existing_key, key, value )
to insert new items at well defined locations. My use case, as I
said before, is a hash which is dumped into human-readable yaml.

What do you expect on conflicts?

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs