Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.ruby > #4770

Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation.

Path csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!gegeweb.org!talisker.lacave.net!lacave.net!not-for-mail
From "Markus H." <shevegen@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.ruby
Subject Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation.
Date Thu, 19 May 2011 12:57:07 -0500
Organization Service de news de lacave.net
Lines 32
Message-ID <7b4d3f42c4659a08f47ce4be39553380@ruby-forum.com> (permalink)
References <iqqupr$i2j$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host bristol.highgroove.com
Content-Type text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace talisker.lacave.net 1305829737 45340 65.111.164.187 (19 May 2011 18:28:57 GMT)
X-Complaints-To abuse@lacave.net
NNTP-Posting-Date Thu, 19 May 2011 18:28:57 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To <iqqupr$i2j$1@dont-email.me>
X-Received-From This message has been automatically forwarded from the ruby-talk mailing list by a gateway at comp.lang.ruby. If it is SPAM, it did not originate at comp.lang.ruby. Please report the original sender, and not us. Thanks! For more details about this gateway, please visit: http://blog.grayproductions.net/categories/the_gateway
X-Mail-Count 383482
X-Ml-Name ruby-talk
X-Rubymirror Yes
X-Ruby-Talk <7b4d3f42c4659a08f47ce4be39553380@ruby-forum.com>
Xref x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.ruby:4770

Show key headers only | View raw

It is difficult to assess whether someone is trolling or just 
disagreeing.

The benefit of doubt should exist.

That said, I want to comment just one thing:

> It's very informal, which is NOT suitable for computing.
> The chatty syntax introduction that: IF can come before
> or after, as you like, and arguments can be bracketed
> or not, as you like and block can use "}" or END; is BAD!

The problem is, you made a statement, but you did not explain why it 
would not be suitable for computing.

It is just syntax after all.

My ruby code is very clean in most cases and I found a code
style which suits me. I love being able to append if or unless


show_debug_message() if @debug

This almost reads like a natural language to me (I tend to use a @debug 
variable for my larger projects when I am debugging them.)

Sure you can do almost the same in other languages, but ruby seems to be 
a lot terser than others.

-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

Back to comp.lang.ruby | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. no.top.post@gmail.com - 2011-05-16 10:37 +0000
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Adam Prescott <adam@aprescott.com> - 2011-05-16 06:15 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Peter Hickman <peterhickman386@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-16 06:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-16 06:52 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Clifford Heath <no@spam.please.net> - 2011-05-17 09:17 +1000
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> - 2011-05-16 19:50 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Stu <stu@rubyprogrammer.net> - 2011-05-17 02:41 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2011-05-18 20:35 +0200
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Robert Dober <robert.dober@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 05:07 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Stu <stu@rubyprogrammer.net> - 2011-05-16 18:30 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. William Rutiser <wruyahoo05@comcast.net> - 2011-05-16 19:21 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Justin Collins <justincollins@ucla.edu> - 2011-05-17 04:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. "Markus H." <shevegen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-19 12:57 -0500
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Kevin <darkintent@gmail.com> - 2011-05-19 13:42 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Brian Candler <b.candler@pobox.com> - 2011-05-20 03:25 -0500
    Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Josh Cheek <josh.cheek@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 07:34 -0500
      Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. spiralofhope <spiralofhope_rubyml@lavabit.com> - 2011-05-20 13:24 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 08:12 -0500
  Re: canonical/syntax-diagrams representation. Intransition <transfire@gmail.com> - 2011-05-20 08:12 -0500

csiph-web