From: Hal Fulton <hal9000@...>
Date: 2006-05-21T15:12:03+09:00
Subject: Re: Curly brackets

Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
> Eric Hodel wrote:
> 
>> You omitted how you would specify which exceptions would be rescued.
>>
>> } else { would be very confusing.
>>
>> Your current solution looks entirely unlike ruby's current exception 
>> catching syntax.
>>
>> Your current solution looks entirely unlike any current ruby code.
> 
> 
> So you agree that there's no way in hell a Ruby programmer would never 
> try to add exception handling to curly bracket blocks? Then why oh why 
> must we support it? 

Are you deliberately misunderstanding? The only agreement I saw is
that this is ugly.

> Why not just add exception handling capabilities to 
> do/end blocks, period -- that's where it feels natural to add rescue 
> clauses, anyway.
> 
> If it's possible to add clauses to do/end blocks and not {} blocks, I 
> don't see a problem at all.

That would be yet another difference between do/end and {}.

Right now, precedence is the only difference. It works well.

If we added it to do/end, we'd have to add it to {}. But heavens,
not using the insane syntax in your last message. Better to leave
it alone.

Furthermore, I question the need for this feature in the first place.


Hal