From: Hongli Lai <hongli@...>
Date: 2008-08-24T18:23:04+09:00
Subject: Re: Why 'if 0' succeeds in Ruby

Dave Bass wrote:
> But unfortunately Ruby regards both false and nil as not-true. For some 
> reason, this is touted as a feature.
> 
> False and nil are two quite different concepts and should not be 
> conflated.

I've found that treating both nil and false as false to be the correct 
behavior for most of my code. I've rarely written code where I *don't* 
want nil to be treated as false. Furthermore, in by far most of the use 
cases, I don't want to treat 0 as false.

In other languages, such as Perl, I end up having to write 'if 
(!defined($foo) || $foo eq "0")' all the time. So I like Ruby's 
behavior. Treating both nil and false as false covers most of the use 
cases.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.