From: Robert Klemme <shortcutter@...>
Date: 2005-08-27T00:08:47+09:00
Subject: Re: to_s and to_str

2005/8/26, Mark Volkmann <r.mark.volkmann@gmail.com>:
> Here's what I've learned so far.
> 1) Every object has to_s because Object provides a default implementation.
> 2) Some classes override to_s to return a more useful String.
> 3) to_str should only be implemented in classes whose objects can
> logically be used as Strings.
> 
> If you're going to implement to_str in a class, is there a reason why
> it might return something different than to_s?  Is one considered a
> human-readable representation and the other something else?

to_s is rather human readable while to_str should return a string
representation of the value that might be used to reconstruct it. Note
that you should have both even if they return the same because to_str
is used in some methods to convert parameters.

> Isn't "can be logically used as Strings" a somewhat subjective thing?

Yes.

Kind regards

robert