The semicolons, imho, aren't visible enough to the (my?) eye. I still
believe that the curly brace to END is a decent option as it already
is familiar to many others. In most other languages the semicolon
denotes an end to a statement which for newbies (such as myself) it
may get confusing.

On 03/02/06, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / ruby-lang.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: Indentation vs. "end"s"
>     on Thu, 2 Feb 2006 06:37:02 +0900, "Rubyist" <nuby.ruby.programmer / gmail.com> writes:
>
> |What do you think about those "end"s? Do you *REALLY* like them?
> |Will Ruby-2 offer an alternative? Well, maybe not "indentation" but
> |will another solution be available?
>
> We are experimenting double semicolons as well as "end"s, so that you
> can type
>
>   class Foo
>     def bar(a)
>       p a
>     ;;
>   ;;
>
> instead of
>
>   class Foo
>     def bar(a)
>       p a
>     end
>   end
>
> Or you can even type
>
>   class Foo
>     def bar(a)
>       p a;;;;
>
> But I'm still not sure if it's good enough to be remained in 2.0.
> No, don't worry, we are NOT going to remove "end"s from the language;
> double semicolons are just alternative.
>
>                                                         matz.
>
>


--
Cheers,
Serdar Kilic
http://weblog.kilic.net/