From: chiaro scuro <kiaroskuro@...>
Date: 2006-05-02T06:38:00+09:00
Subject: Re: from block to code (also: how to get the bindings of a block)

------=_Part_20642_9496607.1146519476275
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

I am aware of this technique, something very similar was also described in =
a
very nice article by Jim Freeze on Ruby Code and Style.

The recipe is just an example as I said.
Truly, I don't see why I shouldn't use the equal signs.

Let's just say that the language makes it hard doing it. No hard feelings, =
I
still love Ruby :-)

We can always do things in other ways, but that's also the argument that
many javists and dotnetters use against ruby.

On 5/1/06, ara.t.howard@noaa.gov <ara.t.howard@noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2 May 2006, chiaro scuro wrote:
>
> > On 5/1/06, Jacob Fugal <lukfugl@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 5/1/06, chiaro scuro <kiaroskuro@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > I need to keep the equal signs.
> >>
> >> This is my big question; why do you need the equal signs? I see
> >> nothing inherent about the "recipe" domain that makes the equal signs
> >> necessary or even desirable. If you were willing to ditch them, a
> >> whole slew of simpler and cleaner implementations are available.
> >>
> >> Jacob Fugal
> >>
> >>
> > I realize that would make it much easier in ruby.
> > It's just that the equal signs make lots of sense to my DSL users.
> (forget
> > the recipes, it's just an example)
> >
> > Look, it's not a matter of life or death.  *of course* I can do without
> if
> > there is no alternative.
> > (eventually I did find a solution to this -although it's a cheesy one-
> but I
> > am not saying yet ;-)
> >
> > It just bothers me that I cannot access that context if I need to, and
> in
> > this case I do.
>
> it would be tough to convince me that people wouldn't find this syntax
> natural:
>
>    harp:~ > cat a.rb
>    class Recipe < Hash
>      attr 'name'
>      def initialize name, &b
>        @name =3D name
>        instance_eval &b
>      end
>      def method_missing m, *a, &b
>        m =3D m.to_s.delete '=3D'
>        self[m] =3D a.size > 1 ? a : a.shift
>      end
>    end
>    def recipe(*a, &b) Recipe.new(*a, &b) end
>
>
>
>    r =3D
>      recipe "breakfast" do
>        eggs 2, :big
>        bacon 3
>      end
>
>    p r
>
>
>    harp:~ > ruby a.rb
>
>
>    {"bacon"=3D>3, "eggs"=3D>[2, :big]}
>
>
> for example, write down a recipe and see if you use the '=3D' sign ;-)
>
> regards.
>
> -a
> --
> be kind whenever possible... it is always possible.
> - h.h. the 14th dali lama
>
>


--
Chiaroscuro
---
Liquid Development: http://liquiddevelopment.blogspot.com/

------=_Part_20642_9496607.1146519476275--