From: "Hal E. Fulton" <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-07-18T04:30:00+09:00
Subject: Re: Keyword "with"

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Anders Borch" <spam@deck.dk>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ruby
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 12:59 PM
Subject: Re: Keyword "with"


> I was merely showing a proof of concept (implementing pre-increment 
> since that was the easy one), but if you like, I shall implement both 
> pre- and postincrement. I saw the flaw you pointed out shortly after 
> posting, but saw no need to complicate my implementation unless someone 
> actually made the explicit distinction between the two forms of 
> incrementation.

Don't consider it a challenge. I'm sure it's doable.

> I am personally against using these tricks in any serious form (remember 
> ruby goto in an earlier post?) 

:)

> or have you ever looked at the AND, OR, 
> NOT macros defined for C? I feel no need to change the language merely 
> for the sake of change. Especially when the change does not add to 
> readability. AND, OR, and NOT are not very readable IMHO there is a need 
> to explicitly specify && or & as logical or binary AND. The == operator 
> does not really add any functionality to ruby, but it would add 
> readability since *a lot* of programmers out there knows pre and post 
> increment.

True, it might help readability. But I don't think
it will ever be in Ruby.

Hal

--
Hal Fulton
hal9000@hypermetrics.com