Brian Candler
11/6/2004 1:38:00 PM
> |Any chance the parenths/space requirement will go away in 2.0?
> |
> | method (1, 2, 3)
>
> Not sure. Only if I can make yacc rules smart enough to parse/detect
>
> method (arg1), arg2
Are you talking about the warning you get if you do
method (1, 2, 3)
instead of
method(1, 2, 3)
?
I wonder if this is related to the bracket ambiguity, i.e.
puts (a+b).abs => puts((a+b).abs)
puts(a+b).abs => (puts(a+b)).abs
Neither of these generates a warning (1.8.2p2), but they do different things
depending on whether the space is there or not.
Trying a few combinations with more than one argument:
1. puts (a+b), c works - no warning is generated
2. puts(a+b), c fails
3. puts(a+b, c) works - no warning
4. puts (a+b, c) works - but generates a warning
5. puts (a+b) works - no warning
6. puts(a+b) works - no warning
So I'm not exactly sure why case 4 generates a warning, but case 5 doesn't.
In case 4, the brackets contain a comma, so surely it must be an argument
list, and therefore must be associated with the method name before it?
The example "method (arg1), arg2" seems to be an example of case 1, and that
works just fine under 1.8.2-p2
There is an ambiguity for
foo(bar (a+b), c)
which generates
warning: parenthesize argument(s) for future version
but it seems to resolve it as
foo(bar((a+b),c))
which I suppose is as reasonable a guess as any.
Regards,
Brian.