From: Stephen Sykes <sdsykes@...>
Date: 2011-01-21T17:50:19+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:34709] Re: [Ruby 1.9-Feature#4288][Open] Allow invoking arbitrary method names with foo."something" syntax

> It does, but my concern with it is that (in the same way as
> string-interpolated ."" syntax) it can't be made 100% parse-time. So I
> think the questions to be answered are (in this order):
>
> 1. Do we feel it's useful to have a quoting mechanism for method
> invocation (that does not use send)?
> 2. Do we want that mechanism to allow runtime determination of the
> method to be called (and how does this water down the value of a
> pure-syntactical quoting mechanism)?
> 3. Do we want the runtime determination to allow arbitrary code
>
> Given that an interpolated mechanism could basically introduce any
> code, your syntax and string-interpolated syntax are largely the same
> feature (i.e. they both go all the way to (3) above.
>
> I definitely want (1). I'm far more dubious on the value of (2) and
> (3) weighed against the benefit...
>

Yes, agree, if you want interpolation you can use send.

But using double quotes leads to an expectation of interpolation does it not?
So would not single quotes be a better proposal in that case?

-Stephen