And this isn't in the Pickaxe book, so that's why I didn't get it... It's
actually quite logical, now that I think about it.

Paul

"Yukihiro Matsumoto" <matz / ruby-lang.org> wrote in message
news:1014688491.715049.27067.nullmailer / ev.netlab.jp...
> Hi,
>
> In message "Rescue clause syntax weirdness...."
>     on 02/02/26, "Paul E.C. Melis" <melis / cs.utwente.nl> writes:
>
> |Why, oh why, does the following make a difference? The first definition
of
> |this particular dumb method parses fine, while the second one causes a
> |syntax error?
>
> Because newlines are significant in Ruby.  While
>
> |  pass rescue true
>
> is a valid sentence, lines
>
> |  pass
> |  rescue true
>
> are two statementes "pass" and "rescue true" separated by a newline,
> and the latter is invalid syntax.
>
> matz.
>