From: Robert Klemme <bob.news@...>
Date: 2005-05-05T01:45:03+09:00
Subject: Re: Bug or on purpose?


"Joe Van Dyk" <joevandyk@gmail.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag 
news:c715e640505040933dc1a4a9@mail.gmail.com...
> On 5/4/05, David A. Black <dblack@wobblini.net> wrote:
>> Hi --
>>
>> On Thu, 5 May 2005, Joe Van Dyk wrote:
>>
>> > Can someone fill me in on what's going on here?
>> >
>> > It looks like the code reads something like:
>> >
>> >  def opa(s)
>> >    'z'
>> >  end
>> >
>> > So,
>> >  opa('kct')
>> > should return 'z'.
>> >
>> > But I have no idea what
>> >  opa = opa('kct')
>> > is trying to do.
>>
>> It's trying to set a local variable called opa to the result of
>> calling (the method) opa with arg 'kct'.
>
> Isn't that illegal?  The name 'opa' has already been defined.

IMHO that's perfectly ok as long as all uses are non ambiguous.

> /me pulls out copy of ISO Ruby standard.
>
> /me notices that it's missing.  :(

/me too

But that's also ok and fits well with Ruby's dynamic nature.  Hint: no 
static typing, no ISO spec.  ;-)

Kind regards

    robert