[TxMt] Why the Ruby syntax needs work

[Thomas Aylott (subtleGradient)]

On Mar 5, 2007, at 9:20 AM, Bryan Liles wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2007, at 10:06 AM, Thomas Aylott (subtleGradient) wrote:
>> On Feb 27, 2007, at 9:14 AM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
>>> Could you btw make a case for the new Ruby syntax? I never  
>>> figured out what problem it was supposed to solve.
>>
>> The default Ruby syntax doesn't scope enough stuff.
>> There are very basic things that are completely missing like
>> 	method calls, operators and lambda variables.
>>
>> My Ruby Experimental adds these basic things and a few other  
>> niceties like leading space and core library method names and  
>> better punctuation support.
>
> How do we get this goodness today?

Get the Experimental Bundle.
Then manually switch languages to Ruby Experimental.

If you want to use Ruby Experimental in Rails of Rails RHTML  
templates then you'll need a few unpublished syntaxes that I have.

http://macromates.com/wiki/Main/SubversionCheckout

thomas Aylott — subtleGradient — CrazyEgg — sixteenColors
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.macromates.com/textmate/attachments/20070305/c3ec1f39/attachment.html>