From: dblack@...
Date: 2002-08-10T13:50:21+09:00
Subject: Re: ambiguity between local variable assignment and writter method

Hi --

On Sat, 10 Aug 2002, Tom Sawyer wrote:

> does anyone else find it annoying that local variable assignment is
> indistinguishable from a writter method.

(Not ignoring the rest of the thread -- just wanted to comment on the
underlying question.)

At first, I found it to be a minor but noticeable fly in the
ointment.  However, I've come to think it's a small price to pay,

Cons:

  1. you have to type what feels like an "extra" "self".

Pros:

  1. in Ruby, you get to leave "self" off a lot, so having it not be
     100% of the time isn't so bad.  One can think of it as: you have
     to specify the receiver, except where it's clear without it, and
     it's clear without it much of the time (which I like).

  2. The "self.thing = x" form is, ultimately, completely consistent
     with Ruby syntax in general; we're not being asked to do
     something anomalous.  Even though this is a special case, it's
     not special syntax.  It's just disambiguation.

  3. It's one of the rites of passage into Ruby to have to master
     this, sort of like realizing that #{...} can interpolate more
     than just single variables :-)

Follow-up to #2: for that reason (i.e., providing a receiver is normal
Ruby syntax), I'd rather it were left like this than that any new
construct were added to avoid it.  That seems like a potentially
never-ending spiral: define syntax; where it's ambiguous, instead of
requiring strict/explicit usage *within* the syntax, introduce a new
construct; eventually, something will crop up with the new construct
that requires disambiguation; create new syntax for that... etc.


David

-- 
David Alan Black
home: dblack@candle.superlink.net
work: blackdav@shu.edu
Web:  http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav