From: gabriele renzi <rff_rff@...>
Date: 2004-10-21T20:24:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Python vs. Ruby (Re: A concise description of Ruby?)

Florian Gross ha scritto:


> It isn't and it can make for quite some elegant code if you can call 
> functions directly, though this doesn't fit at all into the Ruby model. 
> (Because we have no public fields and use accessors that look like field 
> access all over the place.)

I think the problem lies in having overlap beetween methods and 
variables, no in the lack of public fields.
If I were going to write my own language I'd state that:
- object and methods share the same namespace
- 'foo' returns object
- 'foo stuff' is a method call, if foo is_a callable it got called
- 'foo()' forces  call
- 'object.foo' is a method call

(yeah, if you have  @foo and object.foo you could write object.foo()().. 
but hey, that would be /my/ language :P )

Anyway this would break ruby in case like
eval(foo,binding) anyway , cause we have a possible overlap beetween a 
local var and a method, now..