[ruby-talk:16282] Re: Strange idea... exporting from a scope

Mathieu Bouchard <[e-mail]> writes:

(btw: I'd appreciate not being copied on these mails. Thanks)

> Besides, can you tell me what is the value of a variable exported from a
> block that's never executed? say you have a #each that is executed zero
> times...

  if (1 == 2)
    a = 99
  end
  p a   #=> nil

This seems to be equivalent to the block never being executed.

  0.times do
    a = 99
  end
  p a  #=>  I;d expect 'nil'


> Just like Ben, I write Perl in a style quite indistinguishable from
> SmallTalk and Ruby.

I admire your discipline. I always found the overhead of creating
classes tipped the balance away from writing the small helper classes
that I write in Smalltalk and Ruby.

> Now this is for *your* definition of bad. I write such "bad" code, I
> also write code that you'd consider "good", and I also write code which 
> generates new methods and classes by itself.

I must not have expressed myself well, as I was actually arguing that
we _not_ make the language favor a particular style of coding. As
such, you could continue to write in any style that you wanted. My
concern with the change was that it would make it harder to write in
this 'bad' style.



Dave