From: Warren Brown Date: 2005-11-24T00:09:00+09:00 Subject: Re: semenatics of if/unless/while statement modifiers Stefan, > So Ruby can't know whether occurence of an equal sign > inside an "if" condition is a programmers intention or > not, unless the LHS of the assignment is a constant > expression. I think the point that you're missing here is that Ruby only spits out the warning if the *RHS* of the assignment is a constant, which changes the "if" to an unconditional branch (i.e. an "always" :o). If you can come up with an instance where an assignment inside an "if" statement spits out a warning but the branch is still undecided at compile time, then you would have a good argument for removing the warning. - Warren Brown