# Meta.proposal.prepend\_with(Ruby Syntax) **URL:** \ **Category:** Ruby\ **Created:** [August 29, 2006, 6:55am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775 "2006-08-29T06:55:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/58956e/32.png) [@casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/casper_the_ghost)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 6:55am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775/1 "2006-08-29T06:55:40Z")
Dear Rubytalkers, I was thinking that one of the reasons for my previous suggestion (combined with the suggestion of moving both inside the brackets) was deemed troublesome was due to it looking too Smalltalkish, so perhaps the following is better?.. Core.proposal.semantics(The Double Bracket Notation) Core.proposal.syntax(‘end’ == ‘.’) CoreLibraries.proposal(New Collections Types) CoreLib.supercede(List, Array) CoreLib.supercede List, Array CoreLib.supercede List, with: Array # Using Ruby 2.0 syntax. StandardLibraries.proposal(Replace Webrick with Mongrel) StdLib.new(NewLibraryNameHere) StdLib.deprecated(OldLibraryNameHere) StdLib.supercedes NewLibraryNameHere, OldLibraryNameHere Libraries.proposal(What About If We Do X?) Lib.new(AwesomeLibraryNameHere) Lib.question(about: LibraryNameHere, Should I…?) Lib.announcement(name: LibraryNameHere, version: 1.0) Lib.ann name: LibraryNameHere, version: 1.0 Meta.discussion Meta.announcement Miscellaneous.question Misc.announcement General.announcement I understand that there is doubt as to the usefulness and the likelikhood of uptake of this or any other syntax, but memes ain’t memes unless they are at least given an initial vector. I also realise that the strings should be quoted and that this proposal is a little too cute, but ideas are for floating; and sinking. Am I 100% serious about this? No. Am I 0% serious about this? No. Anyway, I apologise if the previous attempted usage was irritating. For this to work there needs to be a certain amount of agreement, and it at least highlighted the issue for discussion at this time, even if without a comprehensive solution. thoran ---
**Author:** ![casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/58956e/32.png) [@casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/casper_the_ghost)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 6:59am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775/2 "2006-08-29T06:59:40Z")
On 8/29/06, thoran @ thoran. com [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Dear Rubytalkers, > > I was thinking that one of the reasons for my previous suggestion > (combined with the suggestion of moving both inside the brackets) was > deemed troublesome was due to it looking too Smalltalkish, so perhaps > the following is better?.. > > Core.proposal.semantics(The Double Bracket Notation) > Core.proposal.syntax(‘end’ == ‘.’) > [etc] Don’t forget the effect this will have on the front page of your newsreader/mail client. There’s a limited amount of space for subject lines. martin ---
**Author:** ![casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/58956e/32.png) [@casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/casper_the_ghost)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 7:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775/3 "2006-08-29T07:03:26Z")
removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid wrote: > Dear Rubytalkers, > > I was thinking that one of the reasons for my previous suggestion > (combined with the suggestion of moving both inside the brackets) was > deemed troublesome was due to it looking too Smalltalkish, so perhaps > the following is better?.. Thing is, it will take far less time to just read a line or two of the post to figure out what it is about for the next two years than it would to argue about which notation would be best to use for the above purpose. > thoran ---
**Author:** ![casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/58956e/32.png) [@casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/casper_the_ghost)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2006, 9:46pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775/4 "2006-08-30T21:46:04Z")
On 8/29/06, thoran @ thoran. com [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > I was thinking that one of the reasons for my previous suggestion > (combined with the suggestion of moving both inside the brackets) was > deemed troublesome was due to it looking too Smalltalkish, so perhaps > the following is better?.. You think wrong. The previous suggestion was deemed troublesome because it’s excessively verbose and nonsensical overall. Not that this is any better. If it _really_ bothers you to see this much traffic on ruby-talk, use the newsgroup interface and kill threads you don’t want to read. -austin ---
**Author:** ![casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/c/58956e/32.png) [@casper\_the\_ghost](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/casper_the_ghost)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2006, 6:53pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/meta-proposal-prepend-with-ruby-syntax/66775/5 "2006-08-29T18:53:54Z")
removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid wrote: > Dear Rubytalkers, > > I was thinking that one of the reasons for my previous suggestion > (combined with the suggestion of moving both inside the brackets) was > deemed troublesome was due to it looking too Smalltalkish, so perhaps > the following is better?.. Wow. With all due respect, that’s nuts. – James B. “The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity.” - Edsger W. Dijkstra