Why does openstruct not respond to =?

Ruby
1

Took me aback - there seems to be no reason for OpenStruct not to
permit member access via ostruct[:field] and ostruct[‘field’].

martin

2

On 01.12.2006 13:14, Martin DeMello wrote:

Took me aback - there seems to be no reason for OpenStruct not to
permit member access via ostruct[:field] and ostruct[‘field’].

OpenStruct also does not inherit Enumerable. I guess the story is, if
you need a Hash then use a Hash. The key point of OpenStruct is that
you can use arbitrary member setters and getters not indexed access. Is
there actually a situation where you need both?

Kind regards

robert
3

On 12/1/06, Robert K. [email protected] wrote:

On 01.12.2006 13:14, Martin DeMello wrote:

Took me aback - there seems to be no reason for OpenStruct not to
permit member access via ostruct[:field] and ostruct[‘field’].

OpenStruct also does not inherit Enumerable. I guess the story is, if
you need a Hash then use a Hash. The key point of OpenStruct is that
you can use arbitrary member setters and getters not indexed access. Is
there actually a situation where you need both?

I was trying to collect all the binary options to my app in a hash (as
being somewhat less verbose than the standard OptionParser syntax):

{
:verbose => [“-v”, “–[no-]verbose”, “run verbosely”],
:all => [“-A”, “–all”, “select all files”],
#…
}.each {|k,v| opt.on(*v) {|i| opts.send(:“#{k}=”, i) } }

The last line would have been a lot less ugly as opts[k] = i, and as I
said, there seems no real reason not to allow it.

martin

4

Hi,

In message “Re: why does openstruct not respond to [] and []=?”
on Fri, 1 Dec 2006 21:35:42 +0900, “Martin DeMello”
[email protected] writes:

|{
| :verbose => [“-v”, “–[no-]verbose”, “run verbosely”],
| :all => [“-A”, “–all”, “select all files”],
| #…
|}.each {|k,v| opt.on(*v) {|i| opts.send(:“#{k}=”, i) } }
|
|The last line would have been a lot less ugly as opts[k] = i, and as I
|said, there seems no real reason not to allow it.

Is there any reason that you have to use OpenStruct instead of plain
hash as opts?

						matz.
5

On 12/1/06, Yukihiro M. [email protected] wrote:

Is there any reason that you have to use OpenStruct instead of plain
hash as opts?

In the rest of the code I’d far rather use opts.option than
opts[:option] - the latter ends up looking cluttered.

martin

6

On 01.12.2006 13:35, Martin DeMello wrote:

I was trying to collect all the binary options to my app in a hash (as
being somewhat less verbose than the standard OptionParser syntax):

{
:verbose => ["-v", “–[no-]verbose”, “run verbosely”],
:all => ["-A", “–all”, “select all files”],
#…
}.each {|k,v| opt.on(*v) {|i| opts.send(:"#{k}=", i) } }

The last line would have been a lot less ugly as opts[k] = i, and as I
said, there seems no real reason not to allow it.

Hm… Personally I would prefer the slightly more verbose but less
complex definition of options. Just my 0.02EUR.

Btw, you can of course remedy this simply by just defining #[]= on
instance opts the way you used it here. :slight_smile:

Kind regards

robert