From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2009-06-12T23:18:41+09:00
Subject: Re: method= and block

2009/6/12 Christopher Dicely <cmdicely@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:55 AM, James
> French<James.French@naturalmotion.com> wrote:
>> I would really like to an associate a block in this way. Is there a way round this?
>
> I don't think so. It isn't parsed as a normal method call, its parsed
> as a special construct with the = that is converted into a method call
> in a way which doesn't support picking up a block. I don't really
> think that using = this way would be a good idea even if you could.

+1

If I see this

foo.bar = x do
  something
end

I assume that "foo.bar" becomes the result of evaluating "x do ...
end".  And the Ruby interpreter does so, too.  Joel is absolutely
right about the ambiguity.  Note also that this it is not possible to
somehow make a block work with a "regular" assignment (i.e. a direct
variable assignment):

bar = x do
  something
end

Again, x will be called with the block and the result will be assigned
to bar.  It would be a very bad idea IMHO to introduce inconsistencies
here.  Please rather try to find a different solution.  Note that you
can always do

def bar(&b)
  @block = b
end

And then

foo.bar do
  something
end

Kind regards

robert

-- 
remember.guy do |as, often| as.you_can - without end
http://blog.rubybestpractices.com/