|
|
|
|
|
|
by choward
2094 days ago
|
|
|
It's also not supposed to be used unless you have another method with the same name. Also, what kind of danger are we talking here? I consider mutation dangerous. Danger could also mean it has side effects or that it can raise an error. I wouldn't call it inconsistent but I would call it arbitrary. I would rather just name the method "#{base_method}_#{why_its_dangerous}". For example take ActiveRecord::Base#save and #save! #save mutates and I would consider that dangerous. #save! can raise an error. I would rather name #save! as #save_or_raise_if_invalid. I know it doesn't look as pretty and takes longer to type but I really don't care. Then again, I'm not a big fan of exceptions so I would never call it. |
|
|
All of those things are "dangerous" in this sense.
It is arbitrary, but that's how Ruby works; there's a gray area shared understanding of concepts. The "principle of least surprise" is literally about Matz, and Matz alone. Yes, something may be surprising to you, or not, but it's not about you. This shared taste/understandings/whatever is just how convention works. (Or at least, it did when I was involved with Ruby; it's been a couple of years so I'm out of touch!)