From: mark sparshatt <msparshatt@...>
Date: 2004-11-02T06:54:06+09:00
Subject: Re: Another scrach on head

Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Nov 2004, mark sparshatt wrote:
> 
>> then they'll be surprised when something like
>>
>> re = /./
>> if re.match("a").true? then
>> puts "match"
>> end
>>
>> never prints match
> 
> 
> don't you think would suprise most newbies too?
> 
>   harp:~ > cat a.rb
>   re = /./
>   if re.match("a") == true
>     puts "match"
>   end
> 
>   harp:~ > ruby a.rb
>   (nothing)
> 

The same way when a newbie working in C is surprised when comparing 
against true sometimes fails.

Which is why I thought the create response when seeing someone writing

if a == true

was to hit them round the head with a clue stick and to say, don't do 
that, do this

if a

;-)

But if we add in a true? method then it'll be harder to explain that 
this is the wrong thing to do.

Not that I'm against the idea. I'm just pointing out a potential problem.

--
Mark Sparshatt

> i don't think there is anyway around that the fact that newbies must 
> learn that
> true (in ruby) is a singleton object and that fact can bite you many 
> ways - and
> this is not limited to only #true?
> 

--
Mark Sparshatt