Feature #5065: Allow "}" as an alternative to "end"

• Status: Rejected
• Assignee: -
• Target version: -

[lazaridis.com (Lazaridis Ilias)]

I've noticed issue #5054, subjecting an "endall".

module MyModule
  class MyClass
    def my_method
      10.times do
        if rand < 0.5
          p :small
        endall

To reduce typing, but to keep the levels, the following construct could be allowed:

module MyModule
  class MyClass
    def my_method
      10.times {   # "10.times do" would work, too
        if rand < 0.5
          p :small
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

The speciality of this language would be, that an opening brace is not necessary

Several constructs allow already the use of "{}" (do / end), thus this would be possibly the consistent way to reduce typing effort, but to keep the structure intact.

[technohippy (Yasushi ANDO)]

Your request looks nice for me. Additionally endall will be used at the end of file in most cases, so it's useful if EOF is interpreted as your endall.

[aprescott (Adam Prescott)]

On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 6:28 AM, Lazaridis Ilias [e-mail]:

module MyModule
 class MyClass
   def my_method
     10.times {   # "10.times do" would work, too
       if rand < 0.5
         p :small
       }
     }
   }
 }
}

I can't say I like this proposal, or my own thoughts below, but I would
expect this, instead:

module MyModule {
 class MyClass {
   def my_method {
     10.times {   # "10.times do" would work, too
       if rand < 0.5 {
         p :small
       }
     }
   }
 }
}

This keeps things consistent with blocks, e.g. 10.times { ... }, and makes
sure there are matching pairs.

That said, seeing "class MyClass {" is too great a deviation from existing
Ruby syntax for me to find it acceptable, personally; one of the enjoyable
things about Ruby is the lack of line noise, and this would probably count
as noise added.

[drbrain (Eric Hodel)]

• Category set to Joke

Switched categories to match #5054

[lazaridis.com (Lazaridis Ilias)]

Eric Hodel wrote:

Switched categories to match #5054

Mr. Hodel, I understand your friendly intention, but I didn't meant to "extend" the joke in #5054 (btw: I find an "endall" not a joke, but a worthy construct, too).

I would really like to have the ability to use "}" (or possibly another char) in order to end a block started by "module, class, def" etc.

[technohippy (Yasushi ANDO)]

The same kinds of requests as "endall" are being discussed on #5054 which is set to Joke. So "endall" can be a joke. In the case of "{", the issue below is a bit similar to your's and has been already rejected:
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/729

No offense is meant but you may recognize "Category set to Joke" as almost rejection.

[lazaridis.com (Lazaridis Ilias)]

Yasushi ANDO wrote:

The same kinds of requests as "endall" are being discussed on #5054 which is set to Joke. So "endall" can be a joke.

I do not make jokes on a issue-tracking-system of a programming language (I made them on the user-lists, like I made some on ruby-talk).

(btw: generally, if you want to keep "joke", than it should be a "Tracker" (issue-type) Or possibly "status: joking" - But not an component-type.

In the case of "{", the issue below is a bit similar to your's and has been already rejected:
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/729

It's similar, yes, but not the same.

No offense is meant but you may recognize "Category set to Joke" as almost rejection.

I did not take any offence. What I finally care about is the efficiency of this project.

But "Jokes" do not belong here. Analysing and understanding issues is difficult enough, and something that looks like a joke can be very serious.

E.g., sometimes you have to realize that a proposal you made was a "joke", in order to move on to a more serious proposal.

Mr. Prescott's (serious) comment was correct, and reminded me that "}" is expected to appear paired to an "{".

So, instead of "}", there could be another shortform "end", possibly just an "e" (enables e;e;e;e;e)

There is and issue with "end", at least with the multiple ends (that's why I would not see an "endall" as a joke)

So, I realize that the initial proposal is finally a "joke", you can reject this issue.

Or you can leave it open and change the title to:

Provide a shorter alias for "end" (e.g.: "e")

(if this is to be rejected, too, no problem)

[lazaridis.com (Lazaridis Ilias)]

Yasushi ANDO wrote:
[...]

No offense is meant but you may recognize "Category set to Joke" as almost rejection.

Then make it "Status: Joke?".

[technohippy (Yasushi ANDO)]

• Status changed from Open to Rejected

Rejected because there's no discussion about this issue for three months.

[shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe)]

• Related to Feature #16746: Endless method definition added

[nobu (Nobuyoshi Nakada)]

• Description updated (diff)