Undefine methodcan be caught with rescue 'default' on the end. No biggie.
Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/ Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/ On 05/02/2009, at 4:14 AM, Joshua Abbott <rails-mailing-l...@andreas-s.net > wrote: > > Julian, > > Have you done any benchmark testing on using the &: method? I would be > curious as to why you say it's slower. > > As for uglier - I think that's a personal preference. I personally > would > never recommend chaining 3 methods together as you did for fear that > one > would fail causing the infamous "undefined method ... for nil". To my > eyes, the map.(&:email) is very clean and easy to read without a bunch > of nasty |v| v.email, etc. > > I would be curious about performance tests though since you say it's > slower. I haven't noticed any major performance hit, but I've never > really tested. > > -- Josh > http://iammrjoshua.com > > > Julian Leviston wrote: >> Actually it MUST if you're doing not null queries. <> won't work for >> null >> >> Blog: http://random8.zenunit.com/ >> Learn rails: http://sensei.zenunit.com/ > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
