On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:50:39 +0100 Stephan Soller <stephan.sol...@helionweb.de> wrote:
> > But I do not see in what Ruby-like syntax and point of view are clearer; > > actally, I find D far more readable. > > And even less what this would bring to D. This is interesting in highly > > reflexive languages; even more reflexive than Ruby in fact, where one could > > tweak the block at runtime. But this is not the perspective of D, I guess. > > I think it's a matter of consistency. In Ruby blocks are used all the > time for pretty much everything. In D this isn't the case because > usually templates are used for stuff where blocks are used in Ruby (e.g. > map, group and find in std.algorithm). > > I don't know if it's possible to unify the way to "pass code as an > argument" in D but that's where Ruby really shines in my opinion: > consistency in usage. Agreed (this fits Ruby, I guess, because it's a dynamic, consistent and very reflexive language -- and blocks/procs are objects). Denis -- -- -- -- -- -- -- vit esse estrany ☣ spir.wikidot.com
