[ruby-core:25977] [Feature #2131] f(not x) => syntax error

Issue #2131 has been updated by James M. Lawrence.


matz:
> I am not sure I understand your statement.  They are different.  How
> that big difference does not affect your point?

Because it is already the case that <expression> can have a different
meaning when it appears as f(<expression>).

You gave a good example.  The thing inside parens here:

  [0] + (a,b,c = 1,2,3)

means something different than the thing inside parens here:

  [0] + f(a,b,c = 1,2,3)

Both are valid Ruby syntax.

If there is an objection to the way this behaves, it does not affect
my point because the behavior is already there.  It is already the
case that given some code in parens, placing a method call in front
can change the meaning of that code.  This feature request would not
introduce it.

I think it boils down to letting method-call parens capture everything
contained by them while giving commas the lowest precedence inside.

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/2131

----------------------------------------
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org