Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Enumerable#find_value #14893

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
14 changes: 14 additions & 0 deletions spec/std/enumerable_spec.cr
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -557,6 +557,20 @@ describe "Enumerable" do
end
end

describe "find_value" do
it "finds and returns the first truthy block result" do
[1, 2, 3].find_value { |i| "1" if i == 1 }.should eq "1"
{1, 2, 3}.find_value { |i| "2" if i == 2 }.should eq "2"
(1..3).find_value { |i| "3" if i == 3 }.should eq "3"
end

it "returns the default value if there are no truthy block results" do
{1, 2, 3}.find_value { |i| "4" if i == 4 }.should eq nil
{1, 2, 3}.find_value "nope" { |i| "4" if i == 4 }.should eq "nope"
([] of Int32).find_value false { true }.should eq false
end
end

describe "first" do
it "calls block if empty" do
(1...1).first { 10 }.should eq(10)
Expand Down
19 changes: 19 additions & 0 deletions src/enumerable.cr
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -558,6 +558,25 @@ module Enumerable(T)
raise Enumerable::NotFoundError.new
end

# Yields each value until the first truthy block result and returns that result.
#
# Accepts an optional parameter `if_none`, to set what gets returned if
# no element is found (defaults to `nil`).
#
# ```
# [1, 2, 3, 4].find { |i| i > 2 } # => 3
# [1, 2, 3, 4].find { |i| i > 8 } # => nil
# [1, 2, 3, 4].find(-1) { |i| i > 8 } # => -1
jgaskins marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
# ```
def find_value(if_none = nil, & : T ->)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it would be of some benefit to have the method strictly typed rather than leaving the compiler to infer everything. We had a discussion in the Discord server and concluded it would mean having an overload specifically for a nil/no-default case, but I think that would be better overall:

def find_value(if_none : U, & : T -> V) : V forall U, V
def find_value(& : T -> U) : U? forall U

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm a fan of explicit types, but this is still type inference. What benefit are you seeing here that I'm not seeing?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I find that the explicitness of method signatures are more useful even if there is no real difference between them. It's also clear what the return type of the method is as both I and another Crystal user initially misinterpreted the return type as being the value of the enumerable type (i.e. T). When taking into account Enumerable#find which has an identical signature, it makes sense to be explicit here to reduce confusion.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree that it's more explicit, but I don't know if I agree that it reduces confusion. To my eyes, it just looks like a jumble of type placeholders.

Does the doc comment provide insufficient disambiguation between it and find?

screenshot of the documentation for the find_value method. It reads: Yields each value until the first truthy block result and returns that result.

Copy link
Member

@straight-shoota straight-shoota Aug 25, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think type restrictions are always helpful as they document the expectations of input and ouput types. Even if it's a bit complicated to express.
IMO we should ideally always write down all type restrictions as part of the API documentation.

As a comment on the suggested format, different names T -> V and T -> U are confusing. They're doing the same thing, so both proc types should use the same name for their output type.

each do |i|
if result = yield i
jgaskins marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
return result
end
end
if_none
end

# Returns the first element in the collection,
# If the collection is empty, calls the block and returns its value.
#
Expand Down
Loading