On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Michael Boutros <michael.bout...@gmail.com>wrote:
Yes. Your implementation makes sense. I mean, I believe that if blank? was defined on enumerables as all?(&:blank?) from the very first day, one could have accepted that definition just fine. But the current definition also makes sense to me. Since this is a fundamental predicate in Active Support that has had this semantic since forever, this modification would be backwards incompatible, and the current definition is also just fine in my opinion, I think we should keep it the way it is. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
