From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2010-05-30T18:35:05+09:00
Subject: Re: Inject Loop Syntax

On 29.05.2010 21:47, Intransition wrote:
> I wonder if any other languages have any sort of "multiplicative
> operation" operator. I was thinking about this today b/c sometimes one
> has to use a block where it would read better if it could be avoided.
> For example:
>
>    [:a, :b, :c].each do |x|
>      define_method("#{x}?") do
>        instance_variable_get("@#{x}")
>      end
>    end
>
> I completely made this up off the top of my head, so ignore what it
> actually does. The point is rather it would be cool if the loop could
> described without encasing the code, something like:
>
>    define_method("#{x}?") do<-(x)[:a, :b, :c]

This can never work because the string is evaluated before the method 
call so you would be defining the same method over and over again (if x 
is actually defined in the surrounding scope).

>      instance_variable_get("@#{x}")
>    end
>
> It is kind of like HERE documents, but applied to code. Of course I am
> not sure about the syntax either.

I don't see a solution that is better than the explicit loop you 
presented initially.

Kind regards

	robert

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