That's totally wrong. The point of this style of programming is allow a series of function calls to be written as a linear chain of expressions. It comes from Smalltalk via Eric Evans, who popularized it in the Java world (http://www.martinfowler.com/bliki/FluentInterface.html). This style is favored by people who agree that side effects should be avoided but who don't like to build functional expressions with many levels of nesting (à la Lisp). Evans compared these composite linear expressions to noun phrases in English and argued that they can be a more natural way to express domain concepts in code.

The "with" control structure only resembles this in the degenerate case where every expression in the chain evaluates to the exact same object. Not only that, the "with" keyword expects a series of statements (as opposed to expressions), and that is the exact opposite of what the chaining style is about. This is easily seen in the author's own example: each member of the sequence has to end in a semicolon (i.e. is a statement rather than an expression), so you don't have a single composite expression at all, only a slightly more compact procedural script.