On Fri, 05 Mar 2004 09:22:41 +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote: > On Friday, March 5, 2004, 4:14:43 AM, gabriele wrote: >> il Thu, 04 Mar 2004 16:00:16 +0100, Simon Strandgaard >>>On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 23:33:01 +0900, Chris Pine wrote: >>>> Maybe I'm not understanding what you are getting at, but: >>>[snip] >>>> Or perhaps you meant something I am missing? >>>> >>> >>>Sorry if it wasn't clear.. I wanted to express that it would >>>be really nice if 'rescue' and 'ensure' could be used within >>>do..end blocks. >>> >>>wrapping things in begin..end feels superfluous ;-) > >> +1, and IIRC that rcr just felt in some limbo.. What was wrong with it >> ? > > +10 for me! The RCR probably needs to be resubmitted in the new > format. > I located the lost RCR... its RCR 105: Change do...end to support exception handling http://rcrchive.net/rgarchive/rejected.html matz rejected it for the reason: rescue etc in "do .. end" seem weird when a block consists a loop. Still I think its a great RCR. +8 here ;-) -- Simon Strandgaard