Feature #7907: Give meaning to staby word

• Status: Rejected
• Assignee: matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
• Target version: 3.0

[trans (Thomas Sawyer)]

=begin
I noticed that ->word doesn't mean anything. i.e.

->foo
SyntaxError: (irb):4: syntax error, unexpected '\n', expecting keyword_do_LAMBDA or tLAMBEG
from /opt/Ruby/1.9.3-p327/bin/irb:12:in `'

If that is always so, then could it be given a meaning as a shorthand for method()? i.e.

->foo

would be the same as writing

method(:foo).to_proc

=end

[ko1 (Koichi Sasada)]

• Description updated (diff)
• Assignee set to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)

[matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)]

• Status changed from Open to Rejected

=begin
I think filling the syntax hole eagerly is a bad idea.

Besides that, I don't think making ((%->foo%)) as method(:foo).to_proc seems a good idea,
since foo in ((%->foo{}%)) is a argument name, not a method name.

Matz.
=end

[trans (Thomas Sawyer)]

Ah, ->foo{} did not know that the parenthesis could be left out.

Ok, I'll suggest slight modification then, b/c it still would be nice to have a shorter notation (not just to fill a syntax hole). Could it be a symbol, i.e. ->:foo.

[trans (Thomas Sawyer)]

Once a issue has been rejected, is it necessary to open a new case for a modified form of the proposal? In other words is any one going to see the change if it has already been rejected? As with this case?

[rosenfeld (Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas)]

People will see the changes but when they're looking for open issues to decide what to do about them they won't touch closed issues :)