From: dblack@...
Date: 2007-07-11T06:33:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Yield should be renamed call_block

Hi --

On Wed, 11 Jul 2007, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: Yield should be renamed call_block"
>    on Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:55:04 +0900, dblack@wobblini.net writes:
>
> |If this ends up happening, I would (reluctantly) suggest getting rid
> |of "yield", and just use call.  b.yield, as others have pointed out,
> |doesn't really work semantically: the function isn't yielding, it's
> |being yielded *to*.
>
> Since I am not a English speeker and I usually dont use that particlar
> word, I feel like "yield" as rather like a symbol vaguly related to
> passing valu to the blok.

Vagueness would be OK, maybe, but the problem is bigger than that:
it's that "block.yield" just doesn't express what's happening.

> Besides that, receivers often plays subjective roles for verbs
> (method names), for example thread.kill or file.close, etc.

Those aren't the same, though:

   kill this thread
   close this file stream
   yield this function???   <= doesn't work, in terms of language

It's gets even more confusing with an argument:

   block.yield(x)

Are you yielding x, or the block?

Basically "yield" is a great name for a keyword (please don't remove
it ! :-) but very problematic as a "call" alias.  I'd advise fairly
strongly against using it that way.


David

-- 
* Books:
   RAILS ROUTING (new! http://www.awprofessional.com/title/0321509242)
   RUBY FOR RAILS (http://www.manning.com/black)
* Ruby/Rails training
     & consulting:  Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)