Feature #17392
closed
Is there any plan to unify the namespace after ruby3
Description
Hello.Currently, methods and variables in ruby are separated (lisp-2 semantics), but few people define variables and methods as the same name, right?
Although some people may do this, should we unify the namespace for the better development of ruby in the future? Does this improve the performance of the language and avoid name confusion.
example:
def foo
puts "ruby method"
end
foo = 3
puts foo # show 3
foo() # call method
It doesn't feel very good.But can we add an option switch to ensure compatibility?
use ruby3
def foo
puts "ruby method"
end
foo = 3
puts foo # show 3
foo() # error
If we implement a unified namespace, can we call lambda, proc, block and so on without using call, so that the call forms of methods are unified.
use ruby3
def foo x
return x + 1
end
f = -> x {x + 1}
foo 2 # result = 3
f 2 # result = 3
In this way, we can make the language more friendly and design more unified.And now there is a scope problem: when defining a method within a method, it should not be visible to the public.
def test
def test2
puts "test2"
end
puts "test"
end
test # show "test"
test2 # show "test2" but this method should not be called
Although syntax supports defining methods within methods, they should not be visible to the public, so this is also a problem.
What do you think of this problem? Thank you.
Updated by 
Updated by 
Updated by