From: Kent Dahl <kentda@...>
Date: 2003-06-24T19:46:09+09:00
Subject: Re: Block Scope Statement in the Pickaxe

Robert Klemme wrote:
> 
> "Kent Dahl" <kentda@stud.ntnu.no> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:3EF8143F.45CFEEDD@stud.ntnu.no...
> > Since instance_eval may take a block, would it make sense to change the
> > above error message to something like:
> >  in `instance_eval': wrong argument type Proc (expected String or block)
> 
> IMHO this is not correct.  You might call me pricky but a block can never
> be a method parameter.  You can either have a block associated with a
> method invocation OR have a proc as parameter.  Of course an associated
> block can be easily converted into a proc for subsequent invocations. I'd
> rather change it to
> 
> in `instance_eval': wrong argument type Proc (expected String or no args
> and associated block)

Point taken. For brevity I think I would prefer simply:
 in `instance_eval': wrong argument type Proc (expected String or
associated block)

The 'no args' bits feels like line noise reading it. 

-- 
(\[ 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___)