From: Robert Dober <robert.dober@...>
Date: 2007-06-17T06:09:50+09:00
Subject: Re: Error in ancestor?

On 6/16/07, Morton Goldberg <m_goldberg@ameritech.net> wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2007, at 2:36 PM, Robert Dober wrote:
>
> > On 6/16/07, Morton Goldberg <m_goldberg@ameritech.net> wrote:
> >> P.S. Why 'puts ancestors.inspect' instead of the simpler 'p
> >> ancestors'?
> >
> > Because output is shorter and more readable. I often get bitten by
> > debugging output
> > puts ary1
> > puts ary2
> > ### Where the heck does ary2 start?
> >
> > so I developed a reflex to use inspect for all kind of
> > debugging/demonstrating output.
> > I feel it is goo[df] practice.
>
> But isn't 'p <expression>' shorthand for 'puts
> (<expression>).inspect'? If this is the case and AFAIK it is, then
> you just need to develop a new reflex to use p.
Ah you said p, not puts, that's quite clever...
LOL you are an eagle eye, but you are right of course.
Robert
And yes you can chose the f above ;)

>
> Regards, Morton
>
>


-- 
You see things; and you say Why?
But I dream things that never were; and I say Why not?
-- George Bernard Shaw