From: "Brian Schröder" <ruby@...>
Date: 2004-12-03T19:27:58+09:00
Subject: Re: nested defs, what if...

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 08:20:34 +0900
"trans.  (T. Onoma)" <transami@runbox.com> wrote:

> [snip]
> Well, it's an idea, but I don't think a very good one. In general I don't 
> think this is useful, and would rather obfuscate code if actually used. I 
> think what would be more useful is if such methods were local methods, like 
> local variables:
> 
>   class A
>     def a
>       def b(x)
>         x + 1
>       end
>       10.times{ |i| print b(i) }
>     end
>   end
> 
>   o = A.new
>   o.b  => NoMethodError
>   A.a  => 12345678910
>   o.b  => NoMethodError
> 
> This would allow for embedded subroutines --much more useful.
> 

I tried this in fact while learning ruby, and was disappointed, that it did not
work the way I expected. The last language before Ruby was Delphi (Object
Pascal) where you can have nested subroutines. I think they are a lot clearer
than having to flatten everything out.

Regards,

Brian

-- 
Brian Schr�der
http://www.brian-schroeder.de/