------art_30068_19513680.1139239256323
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

>
> > I think I like this. If it were an RCR, I just might vote for it.
> >
> > But I would want two things:
> >    1. Not too much proliferation, please. "is" and "do" are enough.
> >    2. Let's make it clear that "is/end" and "do/end" shall behave
> >       exactly the same way. No subtle differences, please.
> >
> > This almost makes me want an alias_keyword... but that would probably
> > cause more problems than it would solve.


I definitely wouldn't want that. I really feel that "less is more".
> Less keywords, not more, will result in less confusion.
>
>
I would love the is|do aliasing.  Expressive code should be a primary
concern.
It also seems to be in line with the philosophy of the ruby libraries, the
if/unless constructs, etc..

-- Chiaroscuro --
Liquid Development Blog:
http://feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/liquiddevelopment

------art_30068_19513680.1139239256323--