undefined | Better HN

0 pointssandal16y ago0 comments

So you mean that you prefer this:

Point.with(1, 2).distance_to(Point.with(5, 6))

Over this?

distance [1,2], [5,6]

I guess it depends on how many interesting things you wanted to do with points. As things get more complicated, maybe something like this is worthwhile, but I don't feel that making everything an explicit object is categorically better.

But the section you're quoting is among the most contrived examples that RBP gives, it's mainly just part of a list of the different sorts of argument processing Ruby offers and the trade-offs betweeen them.

Maybe you skimmed and missed that, or maybe you read through and chose to ignore that detail.

0 comments

stevedekorte16y ago

The problems I have with "distance [1,2], [5,6]" are:

0. It breaks the fundamental OO convention and doesn't encapsulate logic and data.

1. It's not clear what it means unless you look up the docs.

2. It's implementation is complex, making it more difficult to understand and maintain

3. It fails to separate concerns, making it less extensible/modifiable. e.g. What if you wanted to override the setting behavior? You couldn't do it in one place.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse