Kernel#require accepting multiple arguments?

ruby-talk
1

What is the reason that Kernel#require only accepts one filename?
Implementing a version of `require' that can take multiple arguments is pretty easy:

   module Kernel
     alias_method :__require__, :require

     def require(*filenames)
       filenames.all? { |file| __require__(file) }
     end
   end

Cheers,
Daniel

2

Perhaps to allow version specification in the future.
E.g.:

    require 'foo', '>= 1.0.1'

like RubyGems require_gem.

Regards,
  Stefan

···

On Sunday 30 October 2005 16:17, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:

What is the reason that Kernel#require only accepts one filename?
Implementing a version of `require' that can take multiple
arguments is pretty easy:

   module Kernel
     alias_method :__require__, :require

     def require(*filenames)
       filenames.all? { |file| __require__(file) }
     end
   end

3

Hi,

···

In message "Re: Kernel#require accepting multiple arguments?" on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:17:06 +0900, Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@gmail.com> writes:

What is the reason that Kernel#require only accepts one filename?

Since we'd like to keep it for "parametrized require" in the future.

              matz.

4

Or you can turn the problem around:

%w[file1 file2].each { |f| require f }

···

On Oct 30, 2005, at 7:17 AM, Daniel Schierbeck wrote:

What is the reason that Kernel#require only accepts one filename?
Implementing a version of `require' that can take multiple arguments is pretty easy:

  module Kernel
    alias_method :__require__, :require

    def require(*filenames)
      filenames.all? { |file| __require__(file) }
    end
  end

--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04

5

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

Hi,

>What is the reason that Kernel#require only accepts one filename?

Since we'd like to keep it for "parametrized require" in the future.

              matz.

Good enough for me!

Cheers,
Daniel

···

In message "Re: Kernel#require accepting multiple arguments?" > on Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:17:06 +0900, Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@gmail.com> writes: