Issue #20580 has been updated by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson). I like this, but I feel like in practice the syntax wouldn't help much. It looks nice when you use it with local variables, but using it with methods would be a huge pain (not to mention the performance aspects) since you have to get the method and convert it to a lambda: ``` 2 |> &obj.instance_method(:whatever) ``` I call methods much more frequently than lambdas, so I'm not sure how much this syntax would improve my life. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20580: Pipe Operator accepting lambda https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20580#change-108824 * Author: martinosis (Martin Chabot) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- I think that the pipe operator was not reflecting the actual pipe operator in functional programming language. In Elixir, Elm, F# etc. The pipe operator takes a value and applies it on the lambda at the right of the operator. Example ``` add_one = -> a { a + 1 } add_two = -> a { a + 2 } 2 |> add_one |> add_two == 5 ``` In combination with the >> operator, some interesting thing can be done. ``` 2 |> add_one >> add_two ``` you can refactor to ``` add_tree = add_one >> add_two 2 |> add_tree ``` I currently use the `then` method on Object to do the equivalent. However this takes more characters and you need to put the closing bracket at the end of the line. ``` 2.then(&add_one >> add_tree) ``` -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/