# The most recommended way of naming methods in Ruby **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [January 18, 2011, 9:17am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930 "2011-01-18T09:17:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![luislavena](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/0ea827/32.png) [@luislavena](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/luislavena)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 9:17am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/1 "2011-01-18T09:17:47Z")
Rubists, What is the most recommended (or the conventional) way of naming methods in Ruby? Do they need to be verb-like or noun-like? In other language like C++, methods are supposed to be verbs because they are dimmed as messages sent to the object. I have asked this because methods in Ruby are also objects. * * * Edmond (ceekays) Software Developer | Baobab Health Trust ([http://www.baobabhealth.org/](http://www.baobabhealth.org/)) | Malawi Cell: +265 999 465 137 | +265 881 234 717 _I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year 2011!!_\* \* ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 10:24am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/2 "2011-01-18T10:24:54Z")
On Jan 18, 2011, at 00:16 , Edmond K. wrote: > What is the most recommended (or the conventional) way of naming methods in > Ruby? Do they need to be verb-like or noun-like? In other language like C++, > methods are supposed to be verbs because they are dimmed as messages sent to > the object. I have asked this because methods in Ruby are also objects. verbs\_underscore\_separated predicate? dangerous\_mutator! ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 10:30am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/3 "2011-01-18T10:30:33Z")
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Edmond K. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > What is the most recommended (or the conventional) way of naming methods in > Ruby? Do they need to be verb-like or noun-like? In other language like C++, > methods are supposed to be verbs because they are dimmed as messages sent to > the object. I have asked this because methods in Ruby are also objects. Not exactly. There was a lengthy discussion here about whether methods are objects or not. Strictly speaking they are not, but you can obtain an object representing a bound or unbound method. > _I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year 2011!!_\* ed.update\_signature! Cheers robert ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 10:41am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/4 "2011-01-18T10:41:52Z")
2011/1/18 Robert K. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Edmond K. > [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > > _I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Prosperous New Year 2011!!_\* > > ed.update\_signature! Lol! \*\>\> ed.updated? > > true > > ed.signature\*\*.datetime > > Mon Jan 03 08:00:25 0200 2011 - That’s what happens when one is using offline mail clients. My offline mail client for some reason is getting an old signature. * * * Edmond(ceekays) Software Developer | Baobab Health Trust ([http://www.baobabhealth.org/](http://www.baobabhealth.org/)) | Malawi Cell: +265 999 465 137 | +265 881 234 717\* \*\* An old dog does not hunt because of speed, but his endurance of the heart.\* \* \* ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 5:22pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/5 "2011-01-18T17:22:18Z")
> - Interrogative methods get phrased as questions: > obj.date\_today? > obj.name? > obj.calculation\_done? As you said; but I would only use this interrogative form myself if the method returned true/false. That’s how it works in core Ruby? ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 5:38pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/6 "2011-01-18T17:38:38Z")
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Shadowfirebird [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > > - Interrogative methods get phrased as questions: > > obj.date\_today? > > obj.name? > > obj.calculation\_done? > > As you said; but I would only use this interrogative form myself if the method > returned true/false. That’s how it works in core Ruby? It’s more relaxed since you can use any object reference as boolean value. For example, you may do class X attr\_accessor :name alias name? name end if the test should return a trueish value if the name is set (actually not nil and not false). Kind regards robert ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 9:02pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/7 "2011-01-18T21:02:13Z")
On Jan 18, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Phillip G. wrote: > - methods that modify the object (or caller) itself, should be exclamations: > obj.truncate! > obj.remove\_name! > obj.date! “Julian” # I wish I could do obj.date “Julian”!, instead. Ah, well. I think the conventional wisdom is that this should only be done only if there is a matching non-mutating method that has the name without the exclamation mark. Gary W. ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2011, 1:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/8 "2011-01-18T13:30:59Z")
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Edmond K. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Rubists, > > What is the most recommended (or the conventional) way of naming methods in > Ruby? Do they need to be verb-like or noun-like? In other language like C++, > methods are supposed to be verbs because they are dimmed as messages sent to > the object. I have asked this because methods in Ruby are also objects. Well, I can’t speak for Rubyists in general, but I aim for the following: - methods that do something should be verbs: obj.calculate obj.set\_name obj.get\_date - methods that are accessors (or behave like them) should be nouns: foo = obj.name puts obj.date obj.calculation - Interrogative methods get phrased as questions: obj.date\_today? obj.name? obj.calculation\_done? - methods that modify the object (or caller) itself, should be exclamations: obj.truncate! obj.remove\_name! obj.date! “Julian” # I wish I could do obj.date “Julian”!, instead. Ah, well. – Phillip G. Though the folk I have met, (Ah, how soon!) they forget When I’ve moved on to some other place, There may be one or two, When I’ve played and passed through, Who’ll remember my song or my face. ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2011, 3:45pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/9 "2011-01-19T15:45:36Z")
> It’s more relaxed since you can use any object reference as boolean > value. For example, you may do > > class X > attr\_accessor :name > alias name? name > end > > if the test should return a trueish value if the name is set (actually > not nil and not false). What, “classname = Myclass.name?”? Ew. Sorry, I wouldn’t be comfortable with that. Where in the core Ruby classes does that happen? ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2011, 9:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/10 "2011-01-19T09:16:02Z")
Le 18 janvier 2011 22:01:11 UTC+2, Gary W. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) a crit : > I think the conventional wisdom is that this should only be done only if > there is a matching non-mutating method that has the name without the > exclamation mark. Someone may give more info on why it should be like this: * * * Edmond Software Developer | Baobab Health Trust ([http://www.baobabhealth.org/](http://www.baobabhealth.org/)) | Malawi Cell: +265 999 465 137 | +265 881 234 717\* \*\* An old dog does not hunt because of speed, but his endurance of the heart.\* ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/11 "2011-01-19T16:12:00Z")
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Shadowfirebird [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > What, “classname = Myclass.name?”? Ew. Sorry, I wouldn’t be comfortable with > that. Where in the core Ruby classes does that happen? I am not sure what you are hinting at. Clarification - just in case: I did _not_ redefine the class’s name in the example above. Cheers robert ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/12 "2011-01-19T18:02:03Z")
On Jan 19, 2011, at 3:13 AM, Edmond K. wrote: > > well. > > > > I think the conventional wisdom is that this should only be done only if > > there is a matching non-mutating method that has the name without the > > exclamation mark. > > Someone may give more info on why it should be like this: I think you left something off. Anyway… Here is a great explanation of the ‘!’ naming convention: [http://dablog.rubypal.com/2007/8/15/bang-methods-or-danger-will-rubyist](http://dablog.rubypal.com/2007/8/15/bang-methods-or-danger-will-rubyist) I was going to try to explain this but why bother when David Black has already done a great job? Gary W. ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 3:53pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/13 "2011-01-20T15:53:45Z")
On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Phillip G. \< [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)\> wrote: > obj.set\_name > obj.get\_date What is this! Java? obj.name # get! obj.date = different\_date # set! ---
**Author:** ![ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/5f9b8f/32.png) [@ceekays](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ceekays)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2011, 12:40pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/the-most-recommended-way-of-naming-methods-in-ruby/201930/14 "2011-01-20T12:40:09Z")
2011/1/19 Gary W. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > > > > > Here is a great explanation of the ‘!’ naming convention: > > [http://dablog.rubypal.com/2007/8/15/bang-methods-or-danger-will-rubyist](http://dablog.rubypal.com/2007/8/15/bang-methods-or-danger-will-rubyist) > > I was going to try to explain this but why bother when David Black has > already done a great job? I like you on this. * * * Edmond Software Developer | Baobab Health Trust ([http://www.baobabhealth.org/](http://www.baobabhealth.org/)) | Malawi Cell: +265 999 465 137 | +265 881 234 717\* \*\* An old dog does not hunt because of speed, but his endurance of the heart.\* \* \*