Dave Thomas wrote:
> 
> 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 long as we're clear that we don't get a vote on the matter :-)

> 
> 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.
> 

Can we all agree, at least, to limit the scope of the debate at this 
point to the question of whether the -> syntax should be removed before 
1.9.1 is released?

I think, and I hope others agree, that design of any new lambda syntax 
(including Eric's bare blocks) should happen in the Ruby 2.0 development 
branch rather than being inserted into 1.9 at this very late date.

	David Flanagan

> 
> Dave
> 
>