On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:36 AM, Joey Zhou <yimutang / gmail.com> wrote:

>
> 1. It makes people happy, writing less code, and no harm to readability.
>


Personally, I would like to hear more on how having another operator for new
Rubyists to learn does not harm readability? One of the oft-cited advantages
of Ruby vs Perl is that Perl so often devolves into characters
indistinguishable from line-noise. Admittedly, it does seem that certain
languages are more than happy to chase down this rabbit hole (Haskell,
Scala, C++, etc.), but I think Ruby is not competing for mind-share with
these sorts of languages. Rather, I think Ruby could stand to learn a lot
from the simplicity of a language like Lua.

Furthermore, I do not think that the worst part of the
obj.method(:meth_name) form is its verbosity or really any part of its
syntax. Instead, what troubles me is all of the various hidden differences
between a method object, a proc object, and a proc(lambda) object, and the
relative uselessness of detached methods (e.g. they can only be rebound to
objects of the same class; not even subclasses are valid). I would rather
see these addressed before worrying about adding new syntax.