There is no such thing as
if 3 in [3, 2, 1]
construct in Ruby? so the common way in Ruby is
if list1.include?(3)
or
if list1.index(3)
is that right? is there an idiom in Ruby to do something like
if 3.in([3,2,1])
or
if 3.in [3,2,1]
There is no such thing as
if 3 in [3, 2, 1]
construct in Ruby? so the common way in Ruby is
if list1.include?(3)
or
if list1.index(3)
is that right? is there an idiom in Ruby to do something like
if 3.in([3,2,1])
or
if 3.in [3,2,1]
Hi –
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, SpringFlowers AutumnMoon wrote:
if list1.index(3)
is that right? is there an idiom in Ruby to do something like
if 3.in([3,2,1])
or
if 3.in [3,2,1]
The include? way is the usual way. Hal F. at one point proposed an
in or in? method that would essentially be:
class Object
def in?(collection)
collection.include?(self)
end
end
but I don’t think it’s on the radar for being added.
David
David A. Black wrote:
On Sun, 23 Sep 2007, SpringFlowers AutumnMoon wrote:
if 3.in [3,2,1]
The include? way is the usual way. Hal F. at one point proposed an
in or in? method that would essentially be:class Object
def in?(collection)
collection.include?(self)
end
endbut I don’t think it’s on the radar for being added.
Hm… wouldn’t that be handy…
i just sort of think that, if you ask me, “have you been to [Hawaii,
China, France]”, i probably should be able to look at each one and tell
you an answer of yes or no, instead of asking [Hawaii, China, France] to
tell whether they have seen me.
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.
Sponsor our Newsletter | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs