[ruby-talk:6779] Re: behavior of Proc#arity?

Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> ...
> |> | a,b,c = 1,2,3    # a=1; b=2; c=3
> |> | a,b   = 1,2,3    # a=1; b=2
> |> | a     = 1,2,3    # a=1
>      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> This should be
> 
>      a,    = 1,2,3    # a=1
> 
> Notice comma following `a'.

Sorry, I missed intervening messages in this thread before posting my
last, which my last one not make much sense (just figured this out...
Netscape can't thread these messages properly, because of the numbers in
the subject line, e.g. "[ruby-talk:6777]" ... have to go back to sorting
by date). 

Anyway, I wasn't aware of the possibility of the trailing comma before
this.  It makes a lot of sense, thanks.  So you seem very consistent to
me too. :-)

[David Alan Black:]
> ...
>    a,b = 1,2,3 
>    a,b, = 1,2,3
> 
> do the same thing.  So maybe there are more syntactical variants than
> actual different situations....

Since the extra comma is to clarify that the variables are to be viewed
as a list (right?), sometimes it would be unnecessary to add the comma,
but it shouldn't change anything in those cases.  So this is fine with
me.

  -- Mark