From: mike@... (Mike Stok)
Date: 2003-07-11T21:14:17+09:00
Subject: Re: Ruby T-Shirt Idea

In article <slrnbgrrkq.du2.tim@vegeta.ath.cx>,
Tim Hammerquist  <tim@vegeta.ath.cx> wrote:

(ignoring the puts gripe :-)

>How about solving that puts() gripe you mentioned:
>
>    sub twice (&) { my $sub = shift; &$sub; &$sub; }

     sub twice (&) { (my $sub = shift)->(); &$sub }
     sub twice (&) { $_[0]() for (1, 2) }
or
     sub twice (&) { $_[0](); $_[0]() }

seem more perlish.  What are all those human readable variable names
doing in your version :-)

>Ugly, but flexible.  No point condemning a language just because
>it doesn't use an entirely different function to tack a newline
>onto arguments. Much better to discriminate based on appearances.
>;)

Hey, I resemble that remark!

Mike

-- 
mike@stok.co.uk                    |           The "`Stok' disclaimers" apply.
http://www.stok.co.uk/~mike/       | GPG PGP Key      1024D/059913DA 
mike@exegenix.com                  | Fingerprint      0570 71CD 6790 7C28 3D60
http://www.exegenix.com/           |                  75D2 9EC4 C1C0 0599 13DA