From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2007-06-01T03:39:20+09:00
Subject: Re: Introducing the "it" keyword

On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 10:21:49PM +0900, Mariusz P??kala wrote:
> On 2007-05-31 21:32:28 +0900 (Thu, May), Jacob Burkhart wrote:
> > consider the clarity of reading these:
> > 
> > with(v+1) do |a|
> >    with(x+2) do |b|
> >        return a if a+b < 10
> >    end
> > end
> > 
> > vs.
> > 
> > with:a(v+1) do
> >    with:b(x+2) do
> >        return a if a+b < 10
> >    end
> > end
> 
> > with:var could be usefull in other scenrios as well, yes?
> 
> Maybe that's just my twisted brain, but I find the first example more
> readable :-)

It's not just yours -- mine, too.  If you wanted to locate the parameter
label in the same place as the expression, I'd say do something more
like this:

  let a = v + 1 in
    let b = x + 2 in
      return a if a + b < 10
    end
  end

Of course, that might require more language-mangling, so overall I'd be
more inclined to use the first "with" example, which just looks like a
block.  Perhaps something like this could be done (where I don't presume
to know what to call the method):

  (v + 1).foo do |a|
    (x + 2).foo do |b|
      return a if a + b < 10
    end
  end

With that syntax, you'd have a more traditional-looking lead-in to your
block.

Of course, I might find the with:a(v+1) syntax more readable if it were
used in a language where that sort of thing was normal.  It just looks
un-Rubylike enough to me that it throws me off in a Ruby context.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Dr. Ron Paul: "Liberty has meaning only if we still believe in it when
terrible things happen and a false government security blanket beckons."