Hi --

On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, John Joyce wrote:

>> 
>> The choice is yours.  :)
>> 
> Yes. You can do as you please.
>
>> Where the style counts more though is in terms of casing.  So for instance:
>> 
>> * Constants start with a capital letter.
>> * Method names are in snake_case.
>> * Class names in CamelCase.
>
> ModuleNames are also camel cased.
>
> Other tip:
> use do and end for multi-line blocks
> use {} for single line blocks
> It's not a rule, just by convention.
>
> Other other tip:
> Rails is not necessarily an example of Ruby. It's an example of Ruby's 
> tendency to become a DSL.
> Many gems will show you different looking but similarly developed 
> not-typical-Ruby-looking style.
> There seems to be a tendency for DSL-like things in Ruby projects as they get 
> developed.
> I think this is a result of Ruby being very very OOPy and very flexible.
> So don't be surprised when some things seem to have their own conventions 
> contrary to "standard" (?!) Ruby

On the other hand... Rails does a lot of things in conformity with
traditional Ruby style, which I think is very good and perhaps very
shrewd. The main departure is a lot of method calls without
parentheses. But the Rails code adheres to two-space indenting,
standard use of this_style and ThisStyle in the appropriate places,
and other standard stylistic things that people are often fond of
pushing aside.


David

-- 
Upcoming training from Ruby Power and Light, LLC:
   * Intro to Ruby on Rails, Edison, NJ, October 23-26
   * Advancing with Rails, Edison, NJ, November 6-9
Both taught by David A. Black.
See http://www.rubypal.com for more info!