From: Florian Frank <flori@...>
Date: 2005-08-05T22:44:17+09:00
Subject: Re: new block notation (was: Re: ruby-dev summary 26468-26661)

On 2005-08-05 11:44:23 +0900, Florian Gro?? wrote:
> I really don't understand the idea behind  x = ->(a, b) { ... }  -- it
> makes as much sense as  x = ^^(a, b) { ... }  to me so I would like if
> it would not replace the anonymous functions or blocks I use so
> frequently.

At first I rejected the syntax, too. But after thinking about it for a
while, it made some sense: if you see -> as a shortcut for "function""
and as a operator that creates a lambda expression with the bound
variables a, b and the body { ... }. If lambda would have been made a
special form instead of a method call, it could have been
lambda(a, b) { ... } as well.

I still like { a, b = 5 -> a ** 2 + b ** 2 } better and think it's more
similar to the older {|| } syntax. (I don't know if there are any
parsing problems with this syntax.)

It's also slightly less confusing in more complex cases. Compare

foo(->(x){ 2 * x }) &->(y){ 3 * y }

to

foo({ x -> 2 * x }) &{ y -> 3 * y}

If the ->() syntax stays, we should get used to cartoon character
swearing jokes like Perlers had to. ;)

-- 
Florian Frank