On May 26, 2008, at 6:31 PM, David Flanagan wrote:

> Dave Thomas wrote:
>> And, anytime Matz wants to call a feature freeze, he just has to say.
>
> I believe that he has all but done that:
>
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/14394
>

I believe we're debating his first escape clause.

As for the second, the addition of 300 built-in methods since then is  
a pragmatic indication that stability is relative.

I'm not sure why this is the issue, though.

We're discussing whether we can find a more generally accepted  
notation for ->. Do we need to do that? The consensus seems to be that  
no one likes it, and many people find it confusing, as -> has  
overloaded meanings for them. If everyone who comments on it finds it  
suboptimal, then that might well signify a cognitive design issue (I'm  
not qualified to judge its severity).

But... I think the addition of method-like parameters to blocks will  
remove all objections. -> will no longer be needed, and people like me  
who always mis-type lambda as lamdba will be able to alias the problem  
away. So let's wait for the patch to make it in, then we can all  
experiment with it and give feedback.



Dave