From: Xeno Campanoli Date: 2005-10-21T14:45:22+09:00 Subject: Re: Oh, one other excuse for wanting this: I'm a firm believer in things working in parallel. If you can define an array of things indexed as truth or false, it should work, and if it works, you should be able to sort it. That being said, I wouldn't mind that much a functionality that didn't let you define such a thing either. xc Xeno Campanoli wrote: > Another perspective is sorting is to bunch things into realms of like > value. > That being said, it wasn't hard once I realized the problem to just > use 1 and 0. > As far as which is bigger, I'd go with the concept that truth is like > existence, and falsehood is like non-existence, and then to assume > whole numbers as is done elsewhere in things like this and say that > something is bigger than nothing. > > Thank you, by the way, for answering me in person. > > Best wishes. > > Sincerely, Xeno > > Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> In message "Re: " >> on Thu, 20 Oct 2005 02:50:03 +0900, Xeno Campanoli >> writes: >> >> |# Here is my bug. It turns out it's not as whacky as I though. It >> just >> |# was failing because Ruby cannot sort booleans; presumably an >> omission: >> >> Sorting is to reorder items according to their value order. How can >> booleans can be sorted? Is there any order between true and false? >> Which is bigger, in that case? >> >> matz. >> >> >> >> >> > -- Xeno Campanoli: http://www.eskimo.com/~xeno The real disaster is ANY TIME WE GET A BUSH FOR PRESIDENT!