Why Ruby?

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2010-12-19 01:01, Walter Bright wrote:
> Simen kjaeraas wrote:
>> The problem of D's lambda syntax is it is optimized for longer
>> functions. Usually, the delegates I write are one line long. I cannot
>> see that this syntax collides with anything at the moment, but feel free
>> to enlighten me:
>>
>> { => 4; }
>> { a => 2*a; }
>> { a, b => a>b; }
>> { => @ + @; } // turns into { a, b => a + b; }
>>
>
> If size and simplicity of typing are critical, are those really better
> than:
>
> "a>b"
>
> ?

No, that syntax is not better.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg