From: gga <GGarramuno@...>
Date: 2007-01-20T21:45:06+09:00
Subject: Re: local variable assertion

dflanagan@gmail.com wrote:
>
> This actually breaks the second-use case for my method.  If the block
> expects parameters, then I want my method to return the block so that
> it can be passed on to the calling method.

Ah, I see. Sorry, I did not catch that from your docs.  It is indeed an
ugly construct.
I'm not sure trying to save a block is a smart move.  You end up with a
method that behaves and returns something very differently just based
on a block's arity.  That's just a huge headache waiting to happen.

I mean.... if you are really concerned about the efficiency of this:

local(:x) { data.each { |x| x*x } }

I'd say you are definitively guilty of premature optimization.


>
> I believe this would actually print 'never run'.  Since x is not a
> local variable, its use in the first block remains local to that block.
>

Correct, actually.  I seemed to have forgotten the x = 0 before the
begin block.  Sorry.

PS. Welcome to the Ruby community.  Looking forward to see what you'll
do with ruby.