From: "Mills Thomas (app1tam)" <app1tam@...>
Date: 2004-05-20T22:36:52+09:00
Subject: Re: Zero is true ... whoda thunk?

-> -----Original Message-----
-> From: Pit Capitain [mailto:pit@capitain.de] 
-> Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 9:53 PM
-> To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
-> Subject: Re: Zero is true ... whoda thunk?
-> 
-> To summarize in other words: there are the obvious tests for 
-> boolean conditions 
-> including predicates (true / false) and an implicit test for 
-> success / no 
-> success (not-nil / nil).
-> 
I agree.  I might say it just a little differently.  The obvious tests are
real boolean-like situations.  Anything implicit, however, says that we
prefer a language with shortcuts.  But if we accept shortcuts, why not the
shortcut 0 == false?

I'm okay with no shortcuts, too. But I find the argument saying, "'0 ==
false' is a programming cultural thing" to be a weak argument.  There are
lots of shortcuts that make sense, once you allow for shortcuts.

-> Does this make more sense? Maybe not, it's 03:50 AM...
-> 

It made sense at 9:30 am, so I guess it worked.

-> Regards,
-> Pit
-> 

Drew