From: sur max <sur.max@...>
Date: 2007-02-16T16:11:19+09:00
Subject: Re: is it behaving strange ?

------=_Part_808_18681744.1171609876001
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

definitely, it seems so natural using

=3D *a,b

and this gives the feel of ruby.

isn't it  ?

On 2/16/07, Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/16/07, Pe=F1a, Botp <botp@delmonte-phil.com> wrote:
> > fr: sur max [mailto:sur.max@gmail.com] :
> > # b =3D [*a,6] # =3D> [9,5,6] ----- false,  compile error
> > # b =3D *a,6 # =3D> [9,5,6]  ----- false, compile error
> >
> > pls be careful. "*" op will splat. so here ruby is just telling/policin=
g
> you not too.
> >
> > I always treat splat op as a black hole. this way i make less mistakes.
> >
> > eg
> >
> > so this is allowed,
> >
> > irb(main):050:0> b,*a=3D1,2,3,4
> > =3D> [1, 2, 3, 4]
> > irb(main):052:0> a
> > =3D> [2, 3, 4]
> >
> > this one is not,
> >
> > irb(main):053:0> b,*a,c=3D1,2,3,4
> > SyntaxError: compile error
> > (irb):53: syntax error, unexpected ',', expecting '=3D' b,*a,c=3D1,2,3,=
4
> > irb(main):054:0>
> >
> > ruby, is telling me that "*a" is a blackhole. The c does "not matter".
> Botp
>
> this is a very nice analogy, however it does only hold for the LHS
> i.e. assignment target and formal parameter lists.
> On the LHS a splatted expression is an *infinite* consumer a blackhole ;)
> On the RHS a splatted expression is a *finite* producer though.
> I see no reason why ..., *a, ... should be forbidden on the RHS.
> to  ... =3D *(a + [b])
> I'd prefer
> ... =3D *a, b
>
> Side note to David:
> after a night of consideration I do not believe that there any
> syntactical problems
> the splat operator already being allowed in front of parenthesis.
> >
> > so is this one,
> >
> > irb(main):056:0> *a
> > SyntaxError: compile error
> > (irb):56: syntax error, unexpected '\n', expecting '=3D'
> >
> > that's a blackhole without a hole or opening. feed it :)
> as mentioned above we are in the producer case here
> > again, another stupid blackhole reasoning.
> I would not go that far ;)
> >
> > nonetheless, splat is a very sweet yet too powerful operator.
> I feel that splat op digress oo-ness. But i believe it's not oo for
> oo's sake. It's solving problems and discovering brilliant solutions.
> Ruby does it w ease and fun. Sometimes, i feel ruby will trend toward
> object and method unification, wherein objects can be methods and vice
> versa. arggh, like matter <=3D=3D> energy.  maybe, a superproc or
> superlamdba in the future... i'll stop now :)
> You might have a point though ;)
> >
> > drive w caution, (black)holes ahead.
> >
> > sorry for the long post fr a nuby.
> > kind regards -botp
> >
> >
> Cheers
> Robert
>
> --
> We have not succeeded in answering all of our questions.
> In fact, in some ways, we are more confused than ever.
> But we feel we are confused on a higher level and about more important
> things.
> -Anonymous
>
>


--=20
sur
http://expressica.com

------=_Part_808_18681744.1171609876001--