How can I describe mutable strings when strings are immutable by default?

Question

When a file has the pragma:

# frozen_string_literal: true

all strings written as literals in that file are frozen by default. When I want my strings to be immutable overall, and hence am using the pragma, but want to have a couple of mutable strings, what is the recommended way to write them?

All I can think of is:

String.new("foo")

Was just going to say `dup` too. It's just that this is the cool new stuff and the community doesn't have a convention on it yet. — ndnenkov, Dec 13 '15 at 11:25
@ndn I don't care about convention. What matter is conciseness, readability, performance, etc. — sawa, Dec 13 '15 at 11:40
there is no new syntax like `"foo"u` if that is what you are asking. You can't get more concise than `Object#dup`. As for performance, I would be surprised if `String.new` is significantly better. — ndnenkov, Dec 13 '15 at 12:12

score 8 · Accepted Answer · answered Dec 15 '15 at 03:34

8

I had missed it. The recommended way is to use the +@ method string literal.

(+"foo").frozen? # => false
(-"foo").frozen? # => true
"foo".frozen? # => true

answered Dec 15 '15 at 03:34

sawa

165,429
45
277
381

score 4 · Answer 2 · answered Dec 13 '15 at 11:24

4

You can dup the literal to make it mutable:

"foo".dup.frozen? # => false

answered Dec 13 '15 at 11:24

Vasfed

18,013
10
47
53

How can I describe mutable strings when strings are immutable by default?

2 Answers2