In Ruby, should we always use "&&", "||" instead of "and", "or" unless for special situations?

Question

Is it true that in most cases, in Ruby, it is best to use &&, || instead of and, or, unless it is some special situations.

I think one of Ruby's design principles is to have least surprises as possible, so using and, or or actually have some surprises... such as and not having a higher precedence than or, while && has a higher precedence than ||.

So I think in most cases, use &&, ||. In know in some special situations, it may require using and, or, but I think if those are intermixed with &&, ||, sooner or later it may create bugs when your coworkers who started in Ruby not so long ago need to edit your code.

See also: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1512547/what-is-the-difference-between-perls-or-and-and-short-circuit-op — socket puppet, Oct 02 '10 at 02:05

score 7 · Accepted Answer · answered Sep 29 '10 at 22:15

7

Yes. Relying on and and or for boolean logic is a good way to introduce subtle bugs into your application.

They do have a place, though. They are a safe and readable option when used as control flow operators.

redirect_to root_url and return

I basically felt the way you did until I read this excellent blog post.

answered Sep 29 '10 at 22:15

Raphomet

3,589
1
23
12

1

This is an awesome post, thanks for sharing. – Chuck Vose Sep 29 '10 at 23:04
1

Misunderstanding or misusing `and`, `or`, and `&&` and `||` is a problem in many languages. People assume (wrongly) that they are interchangable, ignoring the precedence of each. Like Raphomet says, not knowing when to use each one leads to subtle bugs. I agree that the best use of `and` and `or` is as a flow-control, leading to more readable code. Liberal use of `(` and `)` can go a long ways to avoid the problem too, though it can lead to code that looks like line noise... or Perl. – the Tin Man Sep 30 '10 at 00:19

steenslag · Answer 2 · 2013-04-28T16:22:50.797

7

The book 'The Ruby Programming Language' (David Flanagan & Yukihiro Matsumoto) gives two reasons to use 'and'.

readability:

if x > 0 and y > 0 and not defined? d then d = Math.sqrt(x*x +y*y) end
make good use of the lower precedence:

if a = get_from_db(x) and b = get_from_db(y) then do_stuff_with_true_values(a, b) end

(code adapted by me) The last one just wouldn't work with '&&'.

Personally, I use 'and' and 'or' combined with parentheses in case of doubt, for readability.-

edited Apr 28 '13 at 16:22

answered Sep 29 '10 at 22:35

steenslag

79,051
16
138
171

+1 for "combined with parentheses" – the Tin Man Sep 30 '10 at 00:22

score 2 · Answer 3 · edited Oct 11 '10 at 12:02

It's because and, or & not have lower precedence than &&, || and !.

Why? Because it stems from Perl. Larry Wall being a linguist wanted the following to work:

open my $fh, "<", $filename or die $!;

If you replace the or with || then that statement would be parsed like this:

open my $fh, "<", ($filename || die $!);

Which is not good!

So for languages like Perl & Ruby where parenthesis are often optional then this was the solution. Otherwise you would need to write:

open( my $fh, "<", $filename ) || die $!;

See perlop "Logical Not, And, or, Defined or, and Exclusive Or && Logical operators in Perl and Ruby for the full shake down.

/I3az/

In Ruby, should we always use "&&", "||" instead of "and", "or" unless for special situations?

3 Answers3

Linked