Ross Bamford ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> Probably this has been considered before, but I'll ask anyway.
> 
> Before I used Ruby, I used Groovy. In some ways they are (well, were  
> anyway) quite similar, and one feature that I found cool in Groovy that 
> I  often miss in Ruby is the implicit (/default/whatever?) block 
> parameter,  'it':
> 
>     [1,2,3].each { puts it }
> 
> AFAIR this was only provided when no 'it' existed in scope, and the 
> block  had a single argument passed when none were declared. Maybe this 
> would  interfere with Ruby's warnings about block parameter mismatch, or 
> maybe  the implementation doesn't allow for it, but I just wondered if 
> it might  be possible, because I notice I do:
> 
>     [1,2,3].each { |it| puts it }
> 
> and it bugs me a little bit :D

eh, I alwaya thought the same.
And I just discovered that "it" is used in at least another environment:
AliceML seem to use it to mean "the result of the last expression", 
similarly to how we use "_" in irb.

Isn't it nice to write
  x= 2+2
  print it

;)