From: Dominik Bathon <dbatml@...>
Date: 2005-11-19T09:09:51+09:00
Subject: Re: Symbol#inspect bug?

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 00:57:28 +0100, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net>  
wrote:

> On Nov 18, 2005, at 3:22 PM, Dominik Bathon wrote:
>
>> Symbol#inspect should return a valid symbol literal, right?
>
> Not according to the RDoc:
>
> $ ri Object#inspect
> --------------------------------------------------------- Object#inspect
>       obj.inspect   => string
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>       Returns a string containing a human-readable representation of
>       _obj_. If not overridden, uses the +to_s+ method to generate the
>       string.
>
>          [ 1, 2, 3..4, 'five' ].inspect   #=> "[1, 2, 3..4, \"five\"]"
>          Time.new.inspect                 #=> "Wed Apr 09 08:54:39 CDT  
> 2003"

Yes, but:

$ ri Symbol#inspect
--------------------------------------------------------- Symbol#inspect
      sym.inspect    => string
------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Returns the representation of sym as a symbol literal.

         :fred.inspect   #=> ":fred"