RFC - One word alias for require_relative

Discussion in 'Ruby' started by Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 11, 2011.

    David Masover, Jun 17, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  2. Solutions:

    require! 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-17 by Gary Wright
    involve 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-16 by Sam Duncan
    locally 'lib/alter' # 2011-06-11 by Rob Biedenharn
    uniload 'lib/alter' # my
    request 'lib/alter' # my
    include 'lib/alter' # my
    relative 'lib/alter' # my



    require_relative 'lib/baselib'
    require 'sinatra"'


    require! 'lib/baselib"'
    require 'sinatra'


    Applying the change:

    module Kernel
    alias require! require_relative


    I like the word "involve" more, but as "require!" reminds clearly the
    original "require", it's the first choice.

    Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 17, 2011
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ilias Lazaridis

    Ryan Davis Guest

    If you weren't well documented as doing this for the last 8 years, I'd =
    be very inclined to believe this. You're a troll, nothing more, and this =
    explanation fits occam's razor the best.

    Much more like you're an approximately 45 year old living with (and off) =
    his mother who has never worked an honest day in his life (certainly not =
    in tech). Instead of working towards real goals and actually shipping =
    stuff, you pretend to be an analyst "in the abstract"... which means =
    absolutely nothing.

    That is, of course, if your "resume" has even a shred of truth to it.
    If you ever had a real job you'd know what this means.

    Luckily, the thread is now closed... so you can't reply. See? we can do =
    it too (and it means nothing).
    Ryan Davis, Jun 17, 2011
  4. [...]

    Please keep relatives out.

    Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 17, 2011
  5. Ilias,

    So far I have refused dignifying any of your threads any of your threads
    with a response as you are an obvious troll and I find your posting style
    puerile and asinine.

    But now I really have to take offense. Your usage of the word "gay" is
    highly offensive and does not belong on this mailing list.

    This is me politely asking you to go away and leave us all alone. No one
    wants you here. Please stick to your word and stop posting if you really
    mean it when you say this thread is closed.

    - Salk
    Salk Pugh-Pitt, Jun 17, 2011
  6. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    While I can't defend what Ilias is doing here, I think you may have
    misjudged him in this one particular instance. I don't think Ilias meant to
    use the word "gay" offensively, but is using it in a valid context, which is
    to indicate that something is homosexual, i.e. sexually attracted to members
    of the same gender, or loved by those who do.

    For example, rainbows are often used as a symbol of gay pride. Rainbow
    imagery is also highly correlated with unicorns. I don't think what Ilias is
    saying is too much of a stretch.

    Just my two cents.
    A. Stroh Turph, Jun 17, 2011
  7. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    Is this really worth defending Ilias over? And especially when so many
    people are celebrating gay pride this weekend, I think this is in extremely
    bad taste.

    Also I don't buy what you are saying. There's nothing inherently homosexual
    about unicorns and while your point is valid that the rainbow is a symbol of
    gay pride, unicorns are not.

    - Salk
    Salk Pugh-Pitt, Jun 17, 2011
  8. [...]

    Original text:

    "I'm a 13year old kid, which likes to play with the regulars on the
    language forums. "

    Please refrain from changing original content.

    Not every person reads the whole thread.

    Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 17, 2011
  9. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    The only valid response from you in this case is an apology. Don't try to
    weasel out of your disparagement of gays. However, given how much you've
    done on this mailing list that you should apologize for, when instead you
    just continue trolling and remaining highly offensive, I think that's far
    more than any of us can expect.

    Ilias, the best thing you can do right now is go away and never come back,
    but if you'd like to apologize before you go, I'd gladly accept it.

    - Salk
    Salk Pugh-Pitt, Jun 18, 2011
  10. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    You're probably right it isn't worth defending Ilias over. That said...

    I think we just need to agree to disagree here. Personally, I think unicorns
    are pretty gay myself.
    A. Stroh Turph, Jun 18, 2011
  11. See, the rest of the "Freak-Show" sabotages my thread at least with
    their real names.

    Now, the most important things is:

    The technical topic survived, despite the collaborative effort to
    destroy it.

    I have the result.


    Good night, weakest of the "freak-show".

    Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 18, 2011
  12. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    Now you're being just as offensive as Ilias. I'll ask you to respectfully
    cut it out.

    If you really think that unicorns are a symbol of gay pride like rainbows
    are, then find me one gay person who is using them in that context.

    - Salk
    Salk Pugh-Pitt, Jun 18, 2011
  13. [Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

    I'm not sure this really counts, and I'm a bit worried about posting it as
    it's probably NSFW, but here you go:

    A. Stroh Turph, Jun 18, 2011
  14. Let me please try to understand this super-thread:

    - You (Ilias) like the funcionality provided by require_relative.
    - But you don't like the name (too long or whatever).
    - The rest all the world seem to feel ok with current name.
    - You know that you can make a custom alias for your own usage.
    - But that's not enough for you, and you want a cool new name (max 7
    chars) to be included in Ruby core.

    Do I miss something?

    I=C3=B1aki Baz Castillo
    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Jun 20, 2011
  15. "require!" =3D> 8 chars, invalid.
    Iñaki Baz Castillo, Jun 20, 2011
    Christopher Dicely, Jun 20, 2011
  17. require_relative is completely fine. There is almost no sensible
    discussion here, and certainly not one worth 100+ posts, complete with
    people letting Ilias rile them up so that he can truncate text in his
    reply, call it babbling and declare the thread closed and "dismiss"
    people, like he owns the place, which just further aggravates people.
    (Hint: it's intentional. He's being a dick. On purpose.)

    If anyone else had posted his original "scenario", I'd bet it would
    have been largely ignored.

    Can we stop being trolled now? Even if he's somehow not intending to
    be a troll, it's all the same up to trolleomorphism.
    Adam Prescott, Jun 20, 2011
  18. Ilias Lazaridis

    Luc Heinrich Guest

    Trolleomorphism or in other words: if it walks like a troll and quacks =
    like a troll, it's a troll.

    Luc Heinrich -
    Luc Heinrich, Jun 20, 2011
  19. Ilias Lazaridis

    Mike Bethany Guest

    My top 10 suggestions (7 letters are too few):

    10. what?
    09. requirez
    08. winning!
    07. google
    06. magnets
    05. boxxy!
    04. logophobia
    03. potato
    02. nomnomnom

    And my number one suggestion... [drumroll]

    01. mangina
    Mike Bethany, Jun 20, 2011
  20. Which would mean the rule apply, and the question is:

    Is "require_relative" more dangerous than "require", thus "require!"
    would fit the naming-convention?

    I say:

    yes, because you can include everything from your source-tree, where
    "require" loads only from predefined paths.
    This is not the topic.
    The requirement "7 chars" was an optional one.

    Ilias Lazaridis, Jun 20, 2011
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.