unofficial mirror of emacs-devel@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
To: Bozhidar Batsov <bozhidar@batsov.com>
Cc: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>,
	emacs-devel <emacs-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [ruby-mode] Private/protected method definition layout in Ruby 2.1
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:40:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <52D82799.9000408@yandex.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM9Zgm0OZ5=n2f44=T9YZiRTyH3O5U5yWwAd8kSpJ1VftWDhYg@mail.gmail.com>

On 16.01.2014 16:26, Bozhidar Batsov wrote:
> By "current implementation" I meant the current patch. Yeah, I think
> that some way to have defs align to the start of an expression only for
> modifier expressions might be a good idea in the interest of maximum
> flexibility.

They are plain method calls anyway. Like mentioned, `private', etc, are 
not keywords.

> I meant to say that in
> the current implementation of the feature in MRI assigning the result to
> a variable doesn't make much sense, but in the future that might change
> (if the return value becomes a method object instead of a symbol).

I don't think it's likely to change. Previously, the return value was 
undefined. Now that it's specified to be method name symbol, it probably 
won't ever change, in the interests of backward compatibility.

> In Rubinius defs have always returned an object:
>
> def foo; end
> => #<Rubinius::CompiledMethod foo file=(irb)>

Ah, I see. It's probably considered an implementation detail, though.

> Anyways, I think that the current patch will be good enough for most
> users. I was just pointing out some potential problems in case they were
> overlooked by you.

Thanks, but the occasional need for more flexibility is often apparent. 
The question I'm usually trying to answer is whether we can get away 
with fewer options, and still keep users happy.



  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-16 18:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-15 14:41 [ruby-mode] Private/protected method definition layout in Ruby 2.1 Bozhidar Batsov
2014-01-15 16:24 ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-15 18:18   ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-01-15 18:51     ` Stefan Monnier
2014-01-16  5:47 ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-01-16 10:15   ` Bozhidar Batsov
2014-01-16 13:37     ` Dmitry Gutov
2014-01-16 14:26       ` Bozhidar Batsov
2014-01-16 18:40         ` Dmitry Gutov [this message]
2014-01-16 19:38           ` Bozhidar Batsov
2014-01-17  3:17             ` Dmitry Gutov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=52D82799.9000408@yandex.ru \
    --to=dgutov@yandex.ru \
    --cc=bozhidar@batsov.com \
    --cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
    --cc=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).