From: Nikolai Weibull <ruby-talk@...>
Date: 2004-08-06T01:14:38+09:00
Subject: Re: Macros in Ruby

* Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@soyabean.com.au> [Aug 05, 2004 17:40]:
> > perhaps a shorthand:

> >    lambda{ puts 'lambda' } => Proc:0xb74041a0
> >    &{ puts 'lambda too' }  => Proc:0xb74041a1

> If you must have a shortcut, I think 'L' makes more sense.

>   L { puts 'lambda' }    => Proc:0xb74041a0

Or
	\ { puts 'lambda' } => Proc:0xb74041a0

which would make it act sort of like it does in Haskell.  However, I
always figured

	proc{ puts 'proc or lambda' }

or

	lambda{ puts 'proc or lambda' }

was easy enough to understand.  Having a special operator for it seems
utterly redundant, as Gavin says, since creating anonymous functions in
this manner is far from as common as in Haskell (and it's not very
common their either).  And given that Scheme or Lisp that use them for
basically everything don't have a shorter notation (except for (define)
"rewriting") than (lambda) doesn't seem to warrant a shorter notation
for use in Ruby,
	nikolai

--
::: name: Nikolai Weibull    :: aliases: pcp / lone-star / aka :::
::: born: Chicago, IL USA    :: loc atm: Gothenburg, Sweden    :::
::: page: www.pcppopper.org  :: fun atm: gf,lps,ruby,lisp,war3 :::
main(){printf(&linux["\021%six\012\0"],(linux)["have"]+"fun"-97);}