Issue #19918 has been updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze). mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote in #note-1:
Assuming this is intentionally valid, I wonder if `a[&b] = c` should evaluate `b` before `c`.
That's the kind of complications which I think illustrates the Ruby syntax shouldn't support such edge cases. It does not seem nearly useful or used enough to warrant those complications. Literally I have never seen any code using `[]=` with a block. If a block is useful the method should not be named with `[]=` but something clearer so it's easy to pass a block without such contortions. ---------------------------------------- Bug #19918: Should `a[&b]=c` be syntax valid? https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19918#change-104869 * Author: tompng (tomoya ishida) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * ruby -v: ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-10-11T04:46:58Z master 40ab7b8c24) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 3.0: UNKNOWN, 3.1: UNKNOWN, 3.2: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- These codes are syntax valid now. Prism parses it as syntax error. ~~~ruby a[&b]=c a[&b]+=c a[&b]&&=c a[&b]||=c ~~~ Is this syntax intentional or should be error? Issue of Prism https://github.com/ruby/prism/issues/1636 It's added in test_parse.rb https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/40ab7b8c244de20007cb45846f41de3a01f7ea0c/t... -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/