V: Improve standard library in ruby-fashion

Created on 28 May 2020 · 6Comments · Source: vlang/v

I'm polyglot programmer (including Go) and there is no doubt in my mind that Ruby has the best standard library (you're free to disagree :). Would you consider accepting PRs that introduce methods from Ruby? Some examples:

vlib

Source

sheerun

👍2

All 6 comments

By the way, convention of using ! suffix for mutable methods, and ? suffix for methods that return booleans is also worth considering, in my opinion

sheerun on 28 May 2020

👎3

IMO, Ruby follows a different principle of being able to do the same thing in many ways, which contradicts to V's there is only one way to do a thing.

Also, a bang in Ruby is not meant to designate a mutable method. As Matz [said]:

The bang (!) does not mean “destructive” nor lack of it mean non destructive either. The bang sign means “the bang version is more dangerous than its non bang counterpart; handle with care”. Since Ruby has a lot of “destructive” methods, if bang signs follow your opinion, every Ruby program would be full of bangs, thus ugly.

sudo-nice on 29 May 2020

I'm against duplicating functions as well. It just would be nice to write [1,2,3].max() in v

sheerun on 29 May 2020

@sheerun Once we have .max(), we would definitely want to have .max_by() too, and more, and more. And if we go down that road, where should we stop?
On the other hand, it's really easy to implement those methods manually, on demand. And one can write the methods so they work in the most controllable and efficient way.

sudo-nice on 29 May 2020

👎2

Ruby libs definitively have some charm and judging by myself vlang has a great appeal for programmers who like ruby. So having ruby-lib like functionality would be a great advantage but it could also be an extra library.. and even a guide v-for-RUby-devs could do.