ActiveSupport::OrderedHash disappears?

rubyonrails-talk
1

I noticed that ActiveSupport::OrderedHash disappeared from the Rails API pages. Does it mean that it is going to be deprecated?

I know that Hash is ordered in Ruby 1.9, but this subject seems controversial, and in my opinion the ordered hash in Ruby 1.9 should have been called OrderedHash (or SequentialHash), even if it be an alias of the current implementation of Hash. That way one would be free to return to unordered hashes in future versions of Ruby.

I am considering using the ordered hash to store an ordered attribute list with their types, to be able to render their values in a table in the selected order. (This is going to be a constant hash.) I would like to write explicitly in my code that i am using OrderedHash. So, is Rails going to continue implementing ActiveSupport::OrderedHash?

Thanks for any information,

Alexey.

2

I noticed that ActiveSupport::OrderedHash disappeared from the Rails API

pages.

Does it mean that it is going to be deprecated?

I know that Hash is ordered in Ruby 1.9, but this subject seems

controversial, and in my opinion the ordered hash in Ruby 1.9 should

have been called OrderedHash (or SequentialHash), even if it be an alias

of the current implementation of Hash.

That way one would be free to return to unordered hashes in future

versions of Ruby.

In Ruby 1.9, the Hash just maintains insertion order within the hash and

not content ordering (i.e. key and values). Next, OrderedHash acts very

similar in nature to Hash in Ruby 1.9.2 and OrderedHash was being

used for backwards compatibility with Ruby 1.8.7.

I am considering using the ordered hash to store an ordered attribute

list with their types, to be able to render their values in a table in

the selected order.

(This is going to be a constant hash.)

I would like to write explicitly in my code that i am using OrderedHash.

So, is Rails going to continue implementing ActiveSupport::OrderedHash?

If you’re using Ruby 1.9.2, it doesn’t matter if you’re using Hash or

ActiveSupport::OrderedHash because both will yield the same result. Furthermore,

if you declare this as a constant, then you’re saying to the users of the code

that this will not be modified.

Good luck,

-Conrad