From: "Michael W. Ryder" <_mwryder@...>
Date: 2007-05-31T15:40:16+09:00
Subject: Re: Introducing the "it" keyword

Chad Perrin wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 11:30:30AM +0900, Michael W. Ryder wrote:
>> While I realize the Ruby is not C, I think that some of the style 
>> guidelines for C should still apply in Ruby.  One of the ones that was 
>> very important was to make each statement do only one thing.  Your 
>> example of setting a temporary variable to an amount on one line and 
>> then testing that variable on the second line is much easier to read, 
>> and understand, quickly than your statements like 'return %$ unless f(n) 
>> == x'.  This becomes even more important when the test is even more 
>> convoluted such as checking for the position of a string in another 
>> string and returning if it is in a specific location.
> 
> I'm afraid I must disagree.  The only thing I find "unreadable" about
> that is the complete lack of obvious association between %$ and the
> source of the value it contains/labels.  The composition of the
> expression itself, such that the condition test is on the same line as
> the rest of the action, produces absolutely zero difficulty for me.
> 

The problem is when trying to maintain the code.  Suppose you have to 
change the test and it changes what is referenced by %$x or $1 or 
whatever is used.  Now you have to try and determine what you need to 
use for the return to get the correct value.  I find that harder than 
having one line determine the test value and a separate line determining 
what is done with that value.
As I am still maintaining code I wrote over 20 years ago I find that 
clear code is far better than clever.  In the past when working with 
other peoples programs I often found that I had to remove large chunks 
of the code and replace it because the old code was not clear or 
maintainable.


> I get the impression that you don't like the predicate conditional form
> at all, then, and would rather it was stricken from the language.  Yes?
> 

I never said I wanted something stricken from the language.  Much like 
any language I use I don't use all of the parts as there are usually 
more than one way to get the same results.  When programming in C I 
didn't use all the obscure tricks to make one line programs but that 
didn't mean that I wanted those tricks removed from the language.  In 
Ruby I have found that there are usually several ways to accomplish the 
same task and I choose to use those I can maintain, not those that will 
cause endless hours of time to figure out and maintain.