From: tamouse mailing lists <tamouse.lists@...>
Date: 2013-02-16T23:58:00+09:00
Subject: Re: [from BASIC to Ruby] so, what's the proper way to replace funcionality of GOTO ?

On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 8:20 AM, Robert Klemme
<shortcutter@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Stu P. D'naim <lists@ruby-forum.com> wrote:
>> hash inside hash menus, interesting, same as Robert Klemme's example ...
>
> There is one difference: I created a class while the other example
> uses nested Hashes.  Frankly, since with Ruby it is so easy to create
> classes, I do not understand why people go about to suggest creating
> nested structures of Hash and Array combinations.  Look at this
> example:
>
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 8:30 AM, tamouse mailing lists
> <tamouse.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>> @commands = {
>>   '1' => {
>>     :menu => "Thing 1",
>>     :action => lambda {thing1}},
>>   '2' => {
>>     :menu => "Thing 2",
>>     :action => lambda {thing2}},
>>   '0' => {
>>     :menu => "Quit",
>>     :action => lambda { :done }}
>>
>> }
>
> It shows quite obviously that there are "things" which always have a
> "menu" (or rather a name) and an "action".  Why then not just create a
> class for that?
>
> Thing = Struct.new :menu, :action
>
> etc.
>
>> thank you all guys, now I have more than enough ideas how to start my
>> script
>
> Good!
>
> Kind regards
>
> robert


All very true. My initial thought was to refrain from jumping directly
Classes, but it's probably just as well.