Re: Why Ruby?

[Walter Bright]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
Any problem with the other Scala/C#-style one?:
(x, y) =>  x * y

// Lowered to:

(x, y) { return x * y; }

(Maybe that was rejected before due the the weird float operators that are 
now being ditched?)

The problem with the (x,y) parameter lists, where x and y are the parameters, is 
that it is ambiguous with the existing syntax of (x,y) where x and y are types 
and the parameters are omitted.

For example:

void foo(int);