From: Mohammad Khan <mkhan@...>
Date: 2004-11-02T01:17:29+09:00
Subject: Re: Another scrach on head

On Sat, 2004-10-30 at 00:03, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In message "Re: Another scrach on head"
>     on Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:38:43 +0900, Jamis Buck <jgb3@email.byu.edu> writes:
> 
> |No, I mispoke for the sake of simplification. nil and false _evaluate to 
> |false_ in a boolean context, and everything else evaluates to _true_ in 
> |a boolean context.
> 
> Ruby never get passed on telephone test.
> 
> "In Ruby, nil and false are false, but nil is not false, because false
> does not equal to nil.."
> 
> 							matz.

Hi Matz,

Thanks for your reply.
What about 'true'?

My point was,

a = Whatever.new    # other than NilClass or FalseClass

if a
   # block 1
end

if a == true
   # block 2
end

block 1 and block 2 will be executed only when a.class is TrueClass.

I guess,
in #1
other than nil and false, everything is considering as true.
and in #2
we are doing equality test with 'true' that will return a boolean.

If, I am right, shouldn't we  have two have method 'false?' and  'true?' that
will return boolean based on equality test 
with false and true respectively just like nil?.

I am sorry, If I am misunderstanding something or requesting something that shouldn't be.


regards,
Mohammad