RFC - One word alias for require_relative

[David Masover]

=20
I don't care what the masses think and believe, especially those of
your kind.

You mean the kind who have jobs, and program for a living? I suppose if sel=
f-
employment works out for you, then you have nothing to worry about. But if =
you=20
actually want to get a job in Ruby, many of the people who have been replyi=
ng=20
either do have jobs and help out in technical interviews, or are held in hi=
gh=20
esteem by those who do.

But I'm not sure I believe this, either. It's not that you don't care what =
we=20
think -- I think you'd love for us to see you the way you see yourself, as =
a=20
brilliant programmer, a visionary, the sort of person who builds the tools=
=20
we'll all be using tomorrow. I think you also realize how damaging our=20
opinions could be to your career -- why else would you threaten us with leg=
al=20
action? It's just that when it comes down to it, when we ask you for eviden=
ce,=20
you've got nothing to back it up.

It's not that you don't care what we think, it's that you don't see any way=
to=20
change our minds.

That's not entirely true, however. Coming clean and apologizing would go a=
=20
long way. I don't see you doing that sincerely anytime soon (and sarcasm is=
=20
the opposite of sincerity), but feel free to surprise everyone.

(but the thread is now closed, possibly in the next one)

I have to wonder if this is a bizarre attempt at gaining control of an=20
actually-uncontrolled forum, or an actual delusion that you are the arbiter=
of=20
when a thread is closed or not, or what the appropriate topic is.

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

This is a simple Request for Comments.

Scenario:

require_relative 'lib/alter'
require 'alibrary'

Some project manager complains about "require_relative", and asks you
to find a one-word alias.

Which name would you select and for what reasons?

Requirements
must:
* one word

optional:
* ideally a 7 letter word

Solutions:

require! 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-17 by Gary Wright
involve 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-16 by Sam Duncan
locally 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-11 by Rob Biedenharn
uniload 'lib/alter' # my
request 'lib/alter' # my
include 'lib/alter' # my
relative 'lib/alter' # my

-

#old

require_relative 'lib/baselib'
require 'sinatra"'

#new

require! 'lib/baselib"'
require 'sinatra'

-

Applying the change:

module Kernel
alias require! require_relative
end

-

I like the word "involve" more, but as "require!" reminds clearly the
original "require", it's the first choice.

..

 

[Ryan Davis]

On 17 =CE=99=CE=BF=CF=8D=CE=BD, 23:15, Phillip Gawlowski =

wrote:
[...]
=20
What about this:
=20
I'm a 13year old kid, which likes to play with the regulars on the
language forums.

If you weren't well documented as doing this for the last 8 years, I'd =
be very inclined to believe this. You're a troll, nothing more, and this =
explanation fits occam's razor the best.

Much more like you're an approximately 45 year old living with (and off) =
his mother who has never worked an honest day in his life (certainly not =
in tech). Instead of working towards real goals and actually shipping =
stuff, you pretend to be an analyst "in the abstract"... which means =
absolutely nothing.

That is, of course, if your "resume" has even a shred of truth to it.

Is this so? I've seen many [resumes] which mention the = employers/customers
anonymous, with an "references on request".

If you ever had a real job you'd know what this means.

Luckily, the thread is now closed... so you can't reply. See? we can do =
it too (and it means nothing).

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

Much more like you're an approximately 45 year old living with (and off) his mother who has never worked

[...]

Please keep relatives out.

..

 

[Salk Pugh-Pitt]

On 17 =C9=EF=FD=ED, 23:15, Phillip Gawlowski <[email protected]>
wrote:
[...]

What about this:

I'm a 13year old kid, and even I can recognize that unicorns are gay.

Now, the thread has reached 100 posts, its _really_ time to close it.

Have fun, confused soul!

Ilias,

So far I have refused dignifying any of your threads any of your threads
with a response as you are an obvious troll and I find your posting style
puerile and asinine.

But now I really have to take offense. Your usage of the word "gay" is
highly offensive and does not belong on this mailing list.

This is me politely asking you to go away and leave us all alone. No one
wants you here. Please stick to your word and stop posting if you really
mean it when you say this thread is closed.

- Salk

 

[A. Stroh Turph]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

So far I have refused dignifying any of your threads any of your threads
with a response as you are an obvious troll and I find your posting style
puerile and asinine.

But now I really have to take offense. Your usage of the word "gay" is
highly offensive and does not belong on this mailing list.

This is me politely asking you to go away and leave us all alone. No one
wants you here. Please stick to your word and stop posting if you really
mean it when you say this thread is closed.

While I can't defend what Ilias is doing here, I think you may have
misjudged him in this one particular instance. I don't think Ilias meant to
use the word "gay" offensively, but is using it in a valid context, which is
to indicate that something is homosexual, i.e. sexually attracted to members
of the same gender, or loved by those who do.

For example, rainbows are often used as a symbol of gay pride. Rainbow
imagery is also highly correlated with unicorns. I don't think what Ilias is
saying is too much of a stretch.

Just my two cents.

 

[Salk Pugh-Pitt]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

While I can't defend what Ilias is doing here, I think you may have
misjudged him in this one particular instance. I don't think Ilias meant to
use the word "gay" offensively, but is using it in a valid context, which
is
to indicate that something is homosexual, i.e. sexually attracted to
members
of the same gender, or loved by those who do.

For example, rainbows are often used as a symbol of gay pride. Rainbow
imagery is also highly correlated with unicorns. I don't think what Ilias
is
saying is too much of a stretch.

Just my two cents.

Is this really worth defending Ilias over? And especially when so many
people are celebrating gay pride this weekend, I think this is in extremely
bad taste.

Also I don't buy what you are saying. There's nothing inherently homosexual
about unicorns and while your point is valid that the rainbow is a symbol of
gay pride, unicorns are not.

- Salk

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

2011/6/17 Ilias Lazaridis <[email protected]> [...]

I'm a 13year old kid, and even I can recognize that unicorns are gay.

[...]

Original text:

"I'm a 13year old kid, which likes to play with the regulars on the
language forums. "

But now I really have to take offense. Your usage of the word "gay" is
highly offensive and does not belong on this mailing list.

[...]

Please refrain from changing original content.

Not every person reads the whole thread.

..

 

[Salk Pugh-Pitt]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

Please refrain from changing original content.

Not every person reads the whole thread.

The only valid response from you in this case is an apology. Don't try to
weasel out of your disparagement of gays. However, given how much you've
done on this mailing list that you should apologize for, when instead you
just continue trolling and remaining highly offensive, I think that's far
more than any of us can expect.

Ilias, the best thing you can do right now is go away and never come back,
but if you'd like to apologize before you go, I'd gladly accept it.

- Salk

 

[A. Stroh Turph]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

Is this really worth defending Ilias over? And especially when so many
people are celebrating gay pride this weekend, I think this is in extremely
bad taste.

You're probably right it isn't worth defending Ilias over. That said...

Also I don't buy what you are saying. There's nothing inherently homosexual
about unicorns and while your point is valid that the rainbow is a symbol
of
gay pride, unicorns are not.

I think we just need to agree to disagree here. Personally, I think unicorns
are pretty gay myself.

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

[Note:  parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

Please refrain from changing original content.

Not every person reads the whole thread.

The only valid response from you in this case is an apology. Don't try to
weasel out of your disparagement of gays. However, given how much you've
done on this mailing list that you should apologize for, when instead you
just continue trolling and remaining highly offensive, I think that's far
more than any of us can expect.

Ilias, the best thing you can do right now is go away and never come back,
but if you'd like to apologize before you go, I'd gladly accept it.

See, the rest of the "Freak-Show" sabotages my thread at least with
their real names.

Now, the most important things is:

The technical topic survived, despite the collaborative effort to
destroy it.

I have the result.

require!

Good night, weakest of the "freak-show".

..

 

[Salk Pugh-Pitt]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

I think we just need to agree to disagree here. Personally, I think
unicorns
are pretty gay myself.

Now you're being just as offensive as Ilias. I'll ask you to respectfully
cut it out.

If you really think that unicorns are a symbol of gay pride like rainbows
are, then find me one gay person who is using them in that context.

- Salk

 

[A. Stroh Turph]

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

If you really think that unicorns are a symbol of gay pride like rainbows
are, then find me one gay person who is using them in that context.

I'm not sure this really counts, and I'm a bit worried about posting it as
it's probably NSFW, but here you go:

http://ficdn.fashionindie.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/exterface_unicorn_03.jpg

 

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

Is it really so difficult for you people to solve a given problem,
even if you personally don't agree that it is a problem?

Let me please try to understand this super-thread:

- You (Ilias) like the funcionality provided by require_relative.
- But you don't like the name (too long or whatever).
- The rest all the world seem to feel ok with current name.
- You know that you can make a custom alias for your own usage.
- But that's not enough for you, and you want a cool new name (max 7
chars) to be included in Ruby core.

Do I miss something?

--=20
I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo
<[email protected]>

 

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

require! "lib/baselib"
require =C2=A0"sinatra"

Yes, this could be the "winner".

"require!" =3D> 8 chars, invalid.

 

[Christopher Dicely]

This could become my new favourite.

"!" is used as a convention, to clarify that a method "modifies the
object"

This misstates the existing convention; see below.

"!" could be used for stand-alone functions (e.g. the "flat" Kernel
functions which do not operate strictly on an object) to clarify (by
convention) "you should know what you do, possible risks" or simply
"alternate implementation".

This second thing is actually the current convention for "!" for
normal methods (e.g., not just "flat" Kernel functions.): "!"
indicates a more-dangerous alternative when the base name is already
used. It doesn't always indicate a mutating method, and mutating
methods don't always have it.

OTOH, require_relative is much more clear as to what it is doing than
require! would be, amd. anyway, require! is 8 characters, not 7.

 

[Adam Prescott]

OTOH, require_relative is much more clear as to what it is doing than
require! would be, amd. anyway, require! is 8 characters, not 7.

require_relative is completely fine. There is almost no sensible
discussion here, and certainly not one worth 100+ posts, complete with
people letting Ilias rile them up so that he can truncate text in his
reply, call it babbling and declare the thread closed and "dismiss"
people, like he owns the place, which just further aggravates people.
(Hint: it's intentional. He's being a dick. On purpose.)

If anyone else had posted his original "scenario", I'd bet it would
have been largely ignored.

Can we stop being trolled now? Even if he's somehow not intending to
be a troll, it's all the same up to trolleomorphism.

 

[Luc Heinrich]

Can we stop being trolled now? Even if he's somehow not intending to
be a troll, it's all the same up to trolleomorphism.

Trolleomorphism or in other words: if it walks like a troll and quacks =
like a troll, it's a troll.

--=20
Luc Heinrich - (e-mail address removed)

 

[Mike Bethany]

My top 10 suggestions (7 letters are too few):

10. what?
09. requirez
08. winning!
07. google
06. magnets
05. boxxy!
04. logophobia
03. potato
02. nomnomnom

And my number one suggestion... [drumroll]

01. mangina

 

[Ilias Lazaridis]

This misstates the existing convention; see below.
ok


This second thing is actually the current convention for "!" for
normal methods (e.g., not just "flat" Kernel functions.): "!"
indicates a more-dangerous alternative when the base name is already
used.

Which would mean the rule apply, and the question is:

Is "require_relative" more dangerous than "require", thus "require!"
would fit the naming-convention?

I say:

yes, because you can include everything from your source-tree, where
"require" loads only from predefined paths.

It doesn't always indicate a mutating method, and mutating
methods don't always have it.
ok

OTOH, require_relative is much more clear as to what it is doing than
require! would be, amd.

This is not the topic.

anyway, require! is 8 characters, not 7.

The requirement "7 chars" was an optional one.

..