2 ms·
Ugh, I'm just skimming this but it sounds like quick forwarding syntax in Ruby went through a mess of hiccups in development, which is sad, because I think the
by Pxtl 3y ago
Ugh, I'm just skimming this but it sounds like quick forwarding syntax in Ruby went through a mess of hiccups in development, which is sad, because I think the obsession with C/C++ as the gold standard of language development for so long really held the industry back. I love languages that offer convenient forwarding - the verbosity of forwarding in traditionalist C/C++-style programming languages is imho a big source of the horrible abuses of inheritance. Such a shame it's mostly provided in languages that are too dynamic-typed for my tastes.
- icambron 3y agoIt's more that Ruby has a bunch of pre-existing quirks related to the various things you can pass to a function (positional, named, blocks) and even what functions are (methods, blocks, closures) and that quirkiness creates complexity for simple-sounding things like forwarding syntax.