| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This reverts commit 70d6e16fbad75b89dd1798ed697e7732b8606fa3, reversing
changes made to ea4db3bc078fb3093ecdddffdf4f2f4ff3e1e8f9.
Seems to be a code merge done by mistake.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
by Active Support)
Selecting which key extensions to include in active_support/rails
made apparent the systematic usage of Object#in? in the code base.
After some discussion in
https://github.com/rails/rails/commit/5ea6b0df9a36d033f21b52049426257a4637028d
we decided to remove it and use plain Ruby, which seems enough
for this particular idiom.
In this commit the refactor has been made case by case. Sometimes
include? is the natural alternative, others a simple || is the
way you actually spell the condition in your head, others a case
statement seems more appropriate. I have chosen the one I liked
the most in each case.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After a long list of discussion about the performance problem from using varargs and the reason that we can't find a great pair for it, it would be best to remove support for it for now.
It will come back if we can find a good pair for it. For now, Bon Voyage, `#among?`.
|
|
|
|
| |
suggestion!
|
|
|
|
| |
There're a lot of places in Rails source code which make a lot of sense to switching to Object#in? or Object#either? instead of using [].include?.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Ancillary changes: Moved Chars#normalize into a class method; removed
unused UTF_PAT constant.
Signed-off-by: José Valim <jose.valim@gmail.com>
|
|
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kemper <jeremy@bitsweat.net>
|