From: Vidar Hokstad <vidar@...>
Date: 2006-10-29T04:05:10+09:00
Subject: Re: nil.to_s != "nil"


Eero Saynatkari wrote:
> On 2006.10.28 00:20, Phrogz wrote:
> > You are correct that "" != nil, but "nil" != nil also.
> > What are you really trying to achieve? And, did you know that
> > nil.inspect yields "nil"?
>
> Yes. I want consistency.

It is consistent. "to_s" returns a string representation of the
value(s) of the object you call it on.

The value of the object nil is _nothing_ and the empty string is a
sensible representation of that.

Vidar