From: Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@...>
Date: 2005-05-19T21:39:22+09:00
Subject: Re: syntax sugar: treating an object like a method

> >> Another note: as far as I remember there are plans to make
> ()
> >> work for
> >> lambdas.  So currently we have
> >>
> >>>> f = lambda {|x| x+x}
> >> => #<Proc:0x100c3e60@(irb):15>
> >>>> f[10]
> >> => 20
> >>>> f.call 10
> >> => 20
> >>
> >> Then we had additionally
> >>
> >>>> f(10)
> >> => 20
> >
> > Cool.  So, this sounds like the ()/null operator is being
> > implemented with procs/lambdas.  Now if we could just have
> it
> > for the rest of the objects.
> 
> It'll probably work as general mapping to #call so it would
> work with
> everything that has #call.
> 
> Cheers
> 
>     robert

Thanks Robert.  If that is the case, it sounds like I'll get
the main thing I wanted - ()/null operator.

Anybody know if lambdas will also support blocks anytime soon? 
It doesn't seem to make sense why I can't do this:

f = lambda {|*args,&block|puts(*args);block[]}
f[1,2,3] { puts("hi") }

or in the 1.9 syntax:

f = {|*args,&block|puts(*args);block[]}
f(1,2,3) { puts("hi") }

I just grabbed 1.9 and none of this new syntax seems to work.



		
Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html