Why does Ruby use respond_to? instead of responds_to?
I'm curious why Ruby's introspection related method to check if an object responds to a method is respond_to?
instead of responds_to?
It always seems awkward to me but maybe that's because I'm used to respondsToSelector
in objective-c.
Matz prefers second person singular or third person plural:
"responds_to?" probably makes more sense to English speakers than "respond_to?".
Maybe. But I'm Japanese. Ruby is not English. It's the basic naming rule to avoid third person singular form in the standard libraries.
you = Human.new if you.respond_to?(:knock) ... end
How do you know that the receiver is always third person singular? It is possible that the receiver be I
, we
, you
, or they
, or some other thing that represents plurality. In that case, will you still say that responds_to?
is more natural than respond_to?
? In order to preserve generality, it is better to name a method in a form as general as possible. Rather than naming a method in third person singular, it makes more sense to name it in the default, to-less infinitive form, which is also used in dictionaries.