[bonquesha99]

Definitely agree regarding the strange semantics recently like the pipeline[0] or `.:` method reference[1] operators. I do think those kind of functional features would be handy if they behaved correctly and had a more Ruby-like syntax instead of introducing foreign looking operators.

Luckily this new pattern matching feature appears to behave like expected and feels pretty natural - just a new `in` keyword and some variable binding syntax to familiarize ourselves with (which we already kind of use with statements like `rescue`).

Awhile back we experimented with an alternative Ruby pipe operator proof of concept[2] that is "operator-less" and looks just like regular old Ruby blocks with method calls inside of it. Maybe there's still a chance for something like this now that those other implementations have been reverted!

  # regular inverted method calls
  JSON.parse(Net::HTTP.get(URI.parse(url)))

  # could be written left to right
  url.pipe { URI.parse; Net::HTTP.get; JSON.parse }

  # or top to bottom for even more clarity
  url.pipe do
    URI.parse
    Net::HTTP.get
    JSON.parse
  end

[0] Revert pipeline operator: http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/...

[1] Revert method reference operator: https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/16275

[2] Experimental "operator-less" Ruby pipe operator proof of concept: https://github.com/lendinghome/pipe_operator