[#3479] Missing .document files for ext/ libraries — Brian Candler <B.Candler@...>

The ri documentation for zlib, strscan and iconv doesn't get built by 'make

12 messages 2004/10/06

[#3492] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Markus <markus@...>

> In message "Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch"

15 messages 2004/10/11
[#3493] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2004/10/11

Hi,

[#3495] Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch — Markus <markus@...> 2004/10/12

On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 16:16, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

[#3561] 1.8.2 - what can we do to help? — Dave Thomas <dave@...>

Folks:

23 messages 2004/10/26
[#3562] Re: 1.8.2 - what can we do to help? — Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...> 2004/10/27

Hi,

Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch

From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2004-10-11 23:16:44 UTC
List: ruby-core #3493
Hi,

In message "Re: ANN: Free-form-operators patch"
    on Tue, 12 Oct 2004 01:21:08 +0900, Markus <markus@reality.com> writes:

|> * This patch makes difficult to add new operators in the language in
|>   the future.  For example, I might feel like to add '->' behave as
|>   lambda as in Perl6.

|     I don't think the patch would make it any harder to add operators
|in the future--any more than user defined methods make it harder to add
|methods.  In a way, it might make it easier, since they could be written
|in ruby.

As long as it's a binary operator.  I'm thinking something more like
syntax.  For example, Perl6's -> syntax works as "-> x, y {...}",
which would, I think, conflict with any usage of user defined ->
operator.

							matz.

In This Thread