From: james_b@... Date: 2003-04-26T13:08:57+09:00 Subject: Re: block.call vs. yield > In message "Re: block.call vs. yield" > on 03/04/25, dblack@superlink.net writes: > > |Language comment: > | > |'yield' as a method name for blocks strikes me as awkward. In the > |past I've never thought of 'yield'ing as an action performed by > |blocks, nor as something they're asked to do; it's more that they are > |executed because they get control because a 'yield' has already > |happened. > > Sorry I don't understand. Do you mean you don't want a method with > reserved word name? What I got from David's comment, and what the word 'yield' suggests to me, is that a block itself does not yield, but rather a block is executed because some other process has opted to yield process control. For example, when driving in the States (and I imagine there is something similar elsewhere) there are signs that say, 'Yield', meaning one driver must pause and allow other drivers to proceed. The pausing driver is the one processing the 'yield' message, rather than those drivers given the go-ahead. > > Could you restate your statement? > > matz. > p.s. > Wish I were born in English speaking country. Oh, how different things would be ... James