From: "Brian Schröder" <ruby@...>
Date: 2004-12-06T05:52:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Using yield

On Sun, 5 Dec 2004 05:37:26 +0900
"David A. Black" <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:

> Hi --
> 
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2004, Brian [ISO-8859-15] Schr�der wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 09:32:39 +0900
> > "Joe Van Dyk" <joe.vandyk@boeing.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I come from a heavy C++ background, discovered Ruby a few months ago and
> > > love it.
> > > 
> > > I've found that using blocks is a very natural thing.  However, I have
> > > not once used 'yield'.  I'm sure that there are events when using yield
> > > would be helpful, but I have no clue when it would be appropriate to use.
> > > 
> > > Thoughts?  When do you use the 'yield' statement in code?
> > > 
> > > Joe
> > 
> > Yield is just a shortcut for block.call. 
> > 
> > If I am Lazy, and I don't need to pass the block further I use yield. But I
> > believe that normally using block.call is more explicit and therefore
> > preferable. 
> 
> 'yield' is equally explicit, and equally unambiguous.  It tells you
> exactly as much as block.call does.  I wouldn't worry about the
> laziness part of it; if you measure laziness by power per word of
> code, all Ruby programmers are already massively lazy :-)
> 
> 

I see it as not as explicit, as it does not document in the method signature
that the message takes a block.

Regards,

Brian


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