On 4 Jul 2002, Erik [ISO-8859-1] Bågfors wrote:
: On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
: > I personally believe this approach is flawed, especially considering the fact
: > that there is no way (that I know of) to force block parameters to be truly
: > lexically scoped or temporary (i
On Thu, 2002-07-04 at 11:19, Andy Wardley wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure the iterators they build are just closures with named
> > arguments, and behave as any other closure would behave.
>
> Not quite. Ruby iterators expect a block.
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:20:35PM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> I'm pretty sure the iterators they build are just closures with named
> arguments, and behave as any other closure would behave.
Not quite. Ruby iterators expect a block. This is very much like a closure
except that block paramet
