From: Eero Saynatkari <ruby-ml@...>
Date: 2006-09-28T14:13:18+09:00
Subject: Re: Is object[x](y,z) always invalid?

--mFHiwr52TKrxpkjc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2006.09.28 12:55, Ken Bloom wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:18:14 +0900, Alex Gutteridge wrote:
>=20
> > I'm working on converting a Python module (RPy) to Ruby and am trying =
=20
> > to keep the api as close to the original as possible. In Python it =20
> > (appears - my Python is very weak) that this is valid syntax:
> >=20
> > foo[x](y,z)
=2E..
> > foo[x].call(y,z)
> >=20
> > is another option, but goes still further from the Python api. Not a =
=20
> > big problem for sure, but I just wanted to make sure there wasn't =20
> > some magic trick I was missing to make the original Python ('foo[x]=20
> > (y,z)') also valid Ruby.
>=20
> foo[x].call(y,z) may be further from the original python syntax, but it's
> ruby's standard syntax for doing this, as exemplified by Proc objects and
> Method objects. Given the philosophy of duck typing, I don't advise
> trying to depart from this convention.

I would go so far as saying that the standard Ruby syntax for this is

  foo.x y, z

--mFHiwr52TKrxpkjc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFFG1l67Nh7RM4TrhIRAp1mAKCfK5/U5dl+AoK0l0fwJoMxo7wBxACdH026
bHpqkr2DReNC9mefTnlgxsI=
=GrRU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--mFHiwr52TKrxpkjc--