From: Xavier Noria <fxn@...>
Date: 2013-03-27T21:46:13+09:00
Subject: Re: Why don't TrueClass and FalseClass share a common Boolean ancestor

--e89a8ffbae4d3c5fe004d8e76c01
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

This can only be properly answered by a language designer, so here goes an
improper conjecture :).

As you know all objects in Ruby are booleans. In this interpretation of the
situation TrueClass is semantically no different than String: the true
singleton and an empty string are as true objects as any other. Therefore
it needs no extra hierarchy.

--e89a8ffbae4d3c5fe004d8e76c01
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

This can only be properly answered by a language designer, so here goes an =
improper conjecture :).<div><br></div><div>As you know all objects in Ruby =
are booleans. In this interpretation of the situation TrueClass is semantic=
ally no different than String: the true singleton and an empty string are a=
s true objects as any other. Therefore it needs no extra hierarchy.</div>

<div><br></div>

--e89a8ffbae4d3c5fe004d8e76c01--