From: Rick DeNatale <rick.denatale@...>
Date: 2007-10-27T02:44:34+09:00
Subject: Re: Fluent programming in Ruby

On 10/26/07, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brent Roman [mailto:brent@mbari.org]
> > Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 11:22 AM
> > To: ruby-core@ruby-lang.org
> > Subject: Re: Fluent programming in Ruby
> >
> >
> > I suppose you could have irb require a terminating ';'
> > to disambiguate:
> >
> > irb(main):001:0>    puts "hello"
> > irb(main):002:1;    .upcase
> > irb(main):003:1;    ;
> > HELLO
> >
> > This feels very cumbersome to me.
> > Please don't let it come to this.
> > I'd much prefer irb not accept the "fluent ."
>
> I'd much prefer Ruby not accept the 'fluent' style. It's a style I used
> to see in my Perl programming days. I didn't like it then and I don't
> like it now. If you're chaining so many methods that you feel compelled
> to put them on separate lines, you've probably got larger issues.
>
> Thumbs down.

All joking about turning Ruby into Fortran or PL/I aside, I think I
have to agree with Dan.

Although I sometimes split a statement over several lines, it's
usually because I've got a lengthy argument list. e.g. in Rails

    model = MyModel.create! (
                      :attribute1 => value1,
                      :attribute 2 => value 2,
          ...
                      :attributeN => valueN
                 )

I don't see the value in being able to move just a method name to
another line worth the loss of readibility when I miss that little .

-- 
Rick DeNatale

My blog on Ruby
http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/