I'm all with you, you may even use

HOST = :host
PORT = :port

instead of ConstUtils.next_value, but anybody else will tell you
to use modul tests to find your errors instead of letting the
interpreter find them.

(Agreed, sharp knifes are better than dull ones, but even if all
you need is a spoon?)

cheers

Simon


James Britt wrote:

> Question: Would using a constant be equally suitable for expressing 
> intention, and (possibly) less error-prone?
> 
> # Assume ConstUtils.next_value
> # ensures unique values
> HOST = ConstUtils.next_value
> PORT = ConstUtils.next_value
> 
> foo1 = {
>    HOST => 'localhost',
>    PORT => 80
> }
> 
> A downside to using symbols as constants is that this will not raise any 
> exceptions:
> 
> 
> foo1 = {
>    :hots => 'localhost',
>    :prt => 80
> }
> 
> But a typo in a constant will.
> 
> 
> James