[#4595] New block syntax — Daniel Amelang <daniel.amelang@...>

I'm really sorry if this isn't the place to talk about this. I've

25 messages 2005/03/21
[#4606] Re: New block syntax — "David A. Black" <dblack@...> 2005/03/21

Hi --

[#4629] Re: New block syntax — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/03/30

On Monday 21 March 2005 16:17, David A. Black wrote:

[#4648] about REXML::Encoding — speakillof <speakillof@...>

Hi.

15 messages 2005/03/31
[#4659] Re: about REXML::Encoding — "Sean E. Russell" <ser@...> 2005/04/04

On Thursday 31 March 2005 09:44, speakillof wrote:

Re: New block syntax

From: Alexander Kellett <ruby-lists@...>
Date: 2005-03-31 13:12:27 UTC
List: ruby-core #4640
On Thursday 31 March 2005 13:53, Sean E. Russell wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 March 2005 20:55, David A. Black wrote:
> > I prefer that the constructor (and the person reading the code from
> > left to right) know what it's doing as soon as its leftmost token
> > appears.
>
> If I may be allowed a brief ad hominem argument, by this logic, Perl has a
> better syntax than Ruby, because the human can see by the first token of
> any variable what type of variable it is.

not sure why this is ad hominem but then i don't
really do that whole structured argumentation thing :P

perl's use of first token evil is a useless and confusing
typing tip rather than something that requires the user to
do forward lookup and apply fairly strange rules while 
reading pretty frequently used syntax.

to be honest i don't like the way ruby's syntax is
going but thats mainly due to the dislike it seems
to have for missing ()s these days. oh well.

Alex

In This Thread