From: dblack@...
Date: 2006-03-22T23:51:39+09:00
Subject: Re: questions/suggestions from a Ruby newbie

Hi --

On Wed, 22 Mar 2006, Diego.Virasoro@gmail.com wrote:

> Hi,
> first of all let me say I really really like Ruby, and I look forward
> to use it in my projects.

Cool!

> Here it's a list of my current problems:
>
> -Is there a way to have multidimentional arrays in Ruby? Ie something
> like variable[3][2]? One could use arrays of arrays but it does not
> look quite as clear when reading the code.

How about:

   variable[3][2]

? :-)  As long as both variable and variable[3] respond to "[]", you
should be OK.  (They don't even have to be arrays.)

> -I read the discussion about the use of the "end" keyword, and possible
> alternatives. Instead of trying to change that, I think it would be
> easier and more consistent with Ruby's syntax to change the way if,
> unless and while work so that they take a block as an argument. Then
> if/while would work more consistently as the other methods, and in
> particular the iterators: in both cases you could delimit the code with
> a keyword like "end" or the curly bracket. For example these would be
> all acceptable:
>
> if(x==y) do
>  #code
> end
>
> if(x==y) {
>  #code
> }
>
> (the first one would pretty much look like it already does, and one
> could decide that "do" can be omitted to make it compatible with
> existing code.)

That starts to tie the language in knots.  For one thing, if can take
a method with a block:

   if x { }; y end

I think things would start to get much too messy, especially with an
optional "do".

> In other words it would look just like for iterators (more consistent
> Ruby) and at the same time make happy those that want brackets instead
> of keywords to delimit if/while/unless: two birds with one stone.

I don't think people wanting brackets, as a general matter, is a
"bird" in the first place :-)  Consistency isn't really an issue here
either, since if isn't a method; and if if were a method, but the "do"
were optional, it wouldn't be consistent anyway.

In other words, if is a syntactic construct, and code blocks are also
syntactic constructs; but there's no inherent reason why they should
be unified.  (I know Smalltalk and maybe other languages handle
conditionals as methods, but I don't think it would mesh well with
Ruby.)

I would recommend living with these constructs for a while, on their
own terms.  I'm reasonably certain that it will cease to feel like
something is missing or wrong.

> Thank you very much. Anyway Ruby keeps being a great language and I
> really love it (though I have not use it much yet).

It's great, isn't it? :-)


David

-- 
David A. Black (dblack@wobblini.net)
Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypowerandlight.com)

"Ruby for Rails" chapters now available
from Manning Early Access Program! http://www.manning.com/books/black