From: Ross Bamford <rossrt@...>
Date: 2006-05-02T08:56:00+09:00
Subject: Re: from block to code (also: how to get the bindings of a block)

On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 05:11 +0900, 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.
> >
> 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)

In return for keeping the equals signs, would the users let you get away
with a few 'at' symbols?

def recipe(name, &blk)
  o = Object.new
  o.instance_eval(&blk)
  o.instance_variables.inject({}) do |h,s| 
    h[s[1..-1]] = o.instance_variable_get(s)
    h
  end
end
# => nil

recipe "eggs and bacon" do
  @eggs = [2,:big]
  @bacon = 3
end
# => {"bacon"=>3, "eggs"=>[2, :big]}

(Though I'd really recommend most of the other ideas from this thread
over this).

-- 
Ross Bamford - rosco@roscopeco.REMOVE.co.uk