From: Matthew Kerwin <lists@...>
Date: 2013-07-09T08:14:41+09:00
Subject: Re: A very half-baked idea: setting local variables

Hal Fulton wrote in post #1114777:
>
> Note that this wouldn't be a method call (like alias_method) but
> a keyword (like alias) unless "binding of caller" was permitted...
> which is another thing I've wanted but I suppose will never
> happen.
>
> Comments, questions, projectiles?
>

Yeah, I agree with Robert, there's no need to dynamically create local 
variables, just use a hash (dynamically created keys are fine).  And my 
initial gut response is: if you're writing that many variables on the 
left hand side of an assignment, with a single array on the right, 
there's probably something wrong with the architecture.

My other counter-proposal is: hit enter.  If the line is too long, 
develop a syntactic signature for the pattern.  For example:

    foo, bar, baz, alpha, beta,
        gamma, fred, bill, joey = *values

(i.e. lining up the rightmost column, so it's clear that all wrapped 
lines lead to the single assignment operator).  Still not great, but at 
least the line isn't absurdly long, and you don't have to scan as far to 
see the '='


Finally, as a bike-shedding nit-pick: if it were a keyword, convention 
suggests there'd be no comma; and I think putting the destinations on 
the right is a bit confusing.  So if I had to choose, I'd go for:

    assign %I[a b c] values

But again, that's a big "if", and all in all I'm not too keen on the 
idea of dynamically creating local variables.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.