From: Kent Dahl <kentda@...>
Date: 2003-06-24T00:58:13+09:00
Subject: Re: editor / ide recommentation on Windows

nathaniel@NOSPAMtalbott.ws wrote:
> 
> Lothar Scholz [mailto:mailinglists@scriptolutions.com] wrote:
> > Which is by definition impossible for Ruby, Python, PHP, Perl and
> > other languages. All you can get are refactoring suggestions, most of
> > them not more comfortable then a good grep result.
> 
> Really? Why do you say that? I find it interesting that the first
> language for which refactoring was implemented was Smalltalk, which one
> could argue is MORE dynamic than any of the languages you mention. So it
> seems that a refactoring engine is quite plausible for Ruby (and other
> languages like it).

The dynamic nature is only part of the equation. AFAIK, the syntax of
SmallTalk is a lot simpler (machine-wise atleast) than Ruby. The (lack
of) operator precedence in ST springs to mind. Predeclared variables in
ST is a big help also (regarding the "is this a local variable or a
method?" problem). And I don't think ST has the mutable closure
possibilities we have with our blocks. (Pass a block to some method and
suddenly my locals have mutated? Good luck refactoring with that in
mind!)

I'd hazard to guess you'd need a full blown Ruby parser to do any safe
and useful refactoring.

Disclaimer: IMHO, YMMV, IANALL (IAmNotALanguageLawer) and IANAST
(IAmNotASmallTalker).

-- 
(\[ Kent Dahl ]/)_    _~_    _____[ http://www.pvv.org/~kentda/ ]_____/~
 ))\_student_/((  \__d L b__/ (pre-) Master of Science in Technology  )
( \__\_�|�_/__/ ) _)Industrial economics and technological management(
 \____/_�_\____/ (____engineering.discipline_=_Computer::Technology___)