On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 12:47 AM Felipe Contreras
wrote:
> We can replace the Foo object any other kind of Enumerable, and the
> code works just the same:
>
> foo = %w[inbox unread]
I realized this might be too idiomatic of Ruby, it's the same thing as:
foo = [ 'inbox', 'unread' ]
>
On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 6:13 PM David Bremner wrote:
>
> Felipe Contreras writes:
>
> > We don't need a FileNames enumerable object only for a small number of
> > strings,
> > we can just get them directly.
> >
> > This iterator is meant to be transient and works only once, so we better
> >
Felipe Contreras writes:
> We don't need a FileNames enumerable object only for a small number of
> strings,
> we can just get them directly.
>
> This iterator is meant to be transient and works only once, so we better just
> iterate it once.
>
> This is the same approach I took with the Tags
We don't need a FileNames enumerable object only for a small number of strings,
we can just get them directly.
This iterator is meant to be transient and works only once, so we better just
iterate it once.
This is the same approach I took with the Tags object, I was waiting for
feedback on that
