4 ms·

My big takeaway is that Ruby generally does things the "most-popular" way, and that maybe a lot of those obscure languages are obscure for a reason (object["met

• walrus 14y ago
  object["method"](params) is just an alternative syntax. Normally you would do object->method(params).
• ajanuary 14y ago
  You mean like JavaScript? Not sure why it's not listed there next to Pike. var f = [] f['push'](2) // f -> [2] Pike also has the more familiar object->method(params) syntax. It's actually a pretty useful bit of syntax. I've been using it recently when combining multiple objects deserialised from json. var report = [name, dob] var person = { name: 'Andrew', dob: '1980/03/23' } _.each(report, function(prop) { console.log(person[prop]) }
  • wilmoore 14y ago
    Good call...and for those not necessarily using something underscore.js-like (thought almost always nice-to-have): var report = ['name', 'dob']; var person = { name: 'Andrew', dob: '1980/03/23' }; report.forEach(function(prop){ console.log(person[prop]); });
• rll 14y ago
  Not sure about that. The regex for variable identifiers shows that Ruby is alone on the island of languages that force a lowercase first character.
  • aaronblohowiak 14y ago
    Go uses casing for semantic meaning as well. Also, you can use non-A-Z in ruby source. http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Unicode_variable_names#Ruby http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Unicode_variable_names#Ruby
    • objclxt 14y ago
      Go is missing from the analysis (sadly, because it's definitely more popular than some of the languages listed!) - but yes, casing is used to determine the scope of your variables. It's actually a rather elegant solution (I find Go's syntax to be generally elegant, but YMMV)