in reply to Re^3: RFC: Simulating Ruby's "yield" and "blocks" in Perl
in thread RFC: Simulating Ruby's "yield" and "blocks" in Perl

Upvoted for less emotions and more arguments! =)

There is a misunderstanding, I'm neither a Ruby fanboy nor an expert.

I already explained my motivation in detail, namely to show Perls strength.

> BTW, please translate these two to Ruby:

sub search { my $wanted = shift; foreach my $path (@_) { print "Searching in '$path'\n"; find($wanted, $path); } }

ehm, maybe something like?

paths.each do |path| puts "Searching in %{path}" find(wanted, path) end

> Now how big is the leap from a single block to multiple in Perl and in Ruby? How hard is it to do something nontrivial in Perl and in Ruby? Ruby's syntax makes simple things short and awkward and hard things next to impossible.

No idea. Again, my intention was to show that Perl is so flexible that it can even emulate Ruby. Ruby claims to be a DSL language, while Perl can "dsl" Ruby =).

Why shouldn't we steal the sexy parts and add it to our portfolio?

Cheers Rolf

( addicted to the Perl Programming Language)

update

> how do you pass the block to another subroutine/method?

according to Passing Blocks in Ruby Without &block there are basically two possibilities:

Either explicitly adding a &block in the signature or using Proc.new.

update

thats your question?

irb(main):006:0> wanted = "c" => "c" irb(main):021:0> def search (paths, &block) irb(main):022:1> paths.each &block irb(main):023:1> end irb(main):028:0> search ["a", "b", "c"] do irb(main):029:1* |path| irb(main):030:1* puts "Searching in #{path}" irb(main):031:1> puts wanted == path irb(main):032:1> end Searching in a false Searching in b false Searching in c true


Comment on Re^4: RFC: Simulating Ruby's "yield" and "blocks" in Perl
Select or Download Code