Syntax sugar: treating an object like a method

ruby-talk
1

> I'm thinking of yet another RCR and would like to see if
> anybody likes it. I think this would be a sweet feature.
Here
> are the basic components:

Please don't. This would be awful. Ruby doesn't need a ()
operator.

I already knew your answer.

Yahoo! Mail
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html

2

Maybe that suggests that you're proposing really bad ideas, or at
least proposing them badly. You convinced me on the prior RCR. This
one is a bad idea from the top.

-austin

ยทยทยท

On 5/18/05, Eric Mahurin <eric_mahurin@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > I'm thinking of yet another RCR and would like to see if
> > anybody likes it. I think this would be a sweet feature.
> Here
> > are the basic components:
>
> Please don't. This would be awful. Ruby doesn't need a ()
> operator.
I already knew your answer.

--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
               * Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca