Why Ruby?

[spir]

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 11:50:39 +0100
Stephan Soller <stephan.soller at 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