Issue #20770 has been updated by lpogic (Łukasz Pomietło). AlexandreMagro (Alexandre Magro) wrote in #note-47:
The pipe operator is well-known, but this type of operation with assignment is something I haven’t seen before, and I’m not sure of its precedence. The examples also don’t illustrate a strong need for it.
I wanted _str_, _a_simple_json_ and _a_ to be treated as variables, maybe method arguments but impossible to reduce to one line. The notation `a |>= b` could be considered syntactic sugar for `a = a |> b`. Please remember that most binary operators in Ruby have similar syntactic sugar (including `||` and `&&`). I don't see why the "pipe" operator should be an exception. I see the potential for such a feature in situations where we want to perform some operation on an object and replace it with the result. So far, only operations of type `foo.a = foo.a / b` can be written without explicitly referring to `foo.a` twice (`foo.a /= b`). Swapping the order of arguments or using a method instead of an operator breaks the notation. However, using a "pipe" with assignment would give us more freedom, since it would apply to any case where `foo.a` is on both sides of the assignment: `foo.a |>= b / _`, `foo.a |>= _.div b`. Perhaps this is not an essential issue for the idea itself, but I think it may have an impact on the direction of change. Another thing I think is worth considering is the conditional "pipe" operator. It could combine features of the "pipe" operator with the `&&`. Like "pipe" with assignment, it could prevent self-repeating in some cases. Let's assume its notation would be `&>`: ```ruby foo = Struct.new(:bar).new # Please assume the code above is immutable. v = foo.bar &> Integer.sqrt _ # No exception here as right side is evaluated only if foo.bar is not false nor nil. v # => nil ``` How can I put this more simply? ---------------------------------------- Feature #20770: A *new* pipe operator proposal https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20770#change-110796 * Author: AlexandreMagro (Alexandre Magro) * Status: Open ---------------------------------------- Hello, This is my first contribution here. I have seen previous discussions around introducing a pipe operator, but it seems the community didn't reach a consensus. I would like to revisit this idea with a simpler approach, more of a syntactic sugar that aligns with how other languages implement the pipe operator, but without making significant changes to Ruby's syntax. Currently, we often write code like this: ```ruby value = half(square(add(value, 3))) ``` We can achieve the same result using the `then` method: ```ruby value = value.then { add(_1, 3) }.then { square(_1) }.then { half(_1) } ``` While `then` helps with readability, we can simplify it further using the proposed pipe operator: ```ruby value = add(value, 3) |> square(_1) |> half(_1) ``` Moreover, with the upcoming `it` feature in Ruby 3.4 (#18980), the code could look even cleaner: ```ruby value = add(value, 3) |> square(it) |> half(it) ``` This proposal uses the anonymous block argument `(_1)`, and with `it`, it simplifies the code without introducing complex syntax changes. It would allow us to achieve the same results as in other languages that support pipe operators, but in a way that feels natural to Ruby, using existing constructs like `then` underneath. I believe this operator would enhance code readability and maintainability, especially in cases where multiple operations are chained together. Thank you for considering this proposal! -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/