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