From: Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@...>
Date: 2006-07-14T05:47:16+09:00
Subject: Re: Why Ruby over Python?

Stefan Lang <langstefan@gmx.at> writes:

>> > Consider Rake/Rant syntax:
>> >
>> >     task :a do
>> >       ...
>> >     end
>> >
>> >     task :b => :a do
>> >       ...
>> >     end
>>
>> I haven't done much with Rake yet, but fortunately I knew that =>
>> is used to indicate that one task depends on another. I wonder how
>> many people who didn't know Rake would guess that.
>
> You have to learn *any* syntax/API. Important is that it's
> easy to remember and that you don't have to write unnecessary
> code each time you define a task. In Python this would
> probably be done like this:
>
>     def fun_a():
>       ...
>
>     task("a", fun_a)
>
>     def fun_b():
>       ...
>
>     task("b", "a", fun_b)
>
> Having to define the separate functions fun_a and fun_b
> is an unnecessary burden for the programmer. Having to
> invent those function names gets tiresome. And I don't
> see how that would be any clearer than the Ruby version.

<heretic>
I can think of a syntax that is far easier. ;-)

a:
	stuff to do
        for a

b: a
	stuff to do
        for b
</heretic>

-- 
Christian Neukirchen  <chneukirchen@gmail.com>  http://chneukirchen.org