Issue #19324 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev).
Just to add a few points:
1. I don't believe "zip with all arguments the same" has really any
significant usage: at least, in codebases I looked in (Ruby stdlib, Rails, Rubocop,
Sidekiq, my work apps) I can't find any. BTW, the trivial case of "have array of
arrays, and want to zip each row" is just `Array#transpose`
2. From the top of my head, I can't think of more methods like `product` and `zip`
(that process uniformly array of arguments, and wouldn't be the same as
`arguments.reduce(:method)`, like `Hash#merge` is), which, considering (1), seems to leave
`product` as a rare special case, not a useful trend to start;
3. In modern Ruby, chainable `product` is trivially implemented: `arys.then { |first,
*rest| first.product(*rest) }`. If, by chance, [anonymous params for
blocks](https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19370) would become a thing, it would even be
`arys.then { |first, *| first.product(*) }`. It might still look worse than one
specialized method, though.
4. Oh, and returning to `zip`, its first argument **is** special, because it defines the
size of the output:
```ruby
%w[a b c].zip([1, 2], %i[x])
# => [["a", 1, :x], ["b", 2, nil], ["c", nil, nil]]
[1, 2].zip(%w[a b c], %i[x])
# => [[1, "a", :x], [2, "b", nil]]
%i[x].zip(%w[a b c], [1, 2])
# => [[:x, "a", 1]]
```
...so, considering first argument as an "owner" of the operation has its
semantical meaning.
----------------------------------------
Feature #19324: Enumerator.product => Enumerable#product
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19324#change-101426
* Author: zverok (Victor Shepelev)
* Status: Open
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
I know it might be too late after introducing a feature and releasing a version, but I
find `Enumerator.product` quite confusing, and can't find any justification in
#18685.
**Problem 1: It is `Array#product` but `Enumerator.product`**
```ruby
[1, 2].product([4, 5])
# => [[1, 4], [1, 5], [2, 4], [2, 5]]
# Usually, when we add methods to Enumerable/Enumerator which
# already array had before, it is symmetric, say...
[1, nil, 2, 3].compact #=> [1, 2, 3]
[1, nil, 2, 3].lazy.compact.first(2) #=> [1, 2]
# But not in this case:
[1, 2].lazy.product([4, 5]).first(2)
# undefined method `product' for #<Enumerator::Lazy: [1, 2]> (NoMethodError)
# Because you "just" need to change it to:
Enumerator.product([1, 2].lazy, [4, 5]).first(2)
# => [[1, 4], [1, 5]]
```
No other method was "promoted" from Array this way
And in general, I believe core methods tend to belong to the first object in the
expression and not be free module methods, Elixir style.
**Problem 2: It is one letter different from `Enumerator.produce`**
I understand I might be biased here (as a person who proposed `produce`), and that method
is not as popular (yet?) as I hoped, but still, two methods that do completely different
things and differ by one letter, both being somewhat vague verbs (so it is easy to confuse
them unless you did a lot of math and "product" is firmly set for set product in
your head).
I believe that EITHER of two problems would be concerning enough, but the combination of
them seems to be a strong enough argument to make the change?.. (Maybe with graceful
deprecation of module method in one next version, but, considering the Ruby 3.2 is just
released, maybe vice versa, fix the problem in the next minor release?..)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/