From: dblack@... Date: 2002-10-26T10:16:42+09:00 Subject: Re: How come true, false don't support <=> (comparison) operator? Hi -- On Sat, 26 Oct 2002, Gavin Sinclair wrote: > From: "William Djaja Tjokroaminata" > > > > Rudi Cilibrasi wrote: > > > > > In thinking about possibilities for future versions of Ruby, perhaps > > > it would make sense to have TrueClass and FalseClass both derive > > > from a common base class, say, BooleanClass. > > > > Hi, > > > > Actually I am wondering the same thing. There was a recent similar > > question > > > > http://www.ruby-talk.org/53560 > > > > but there was no response to it. Just the fact that it is asked again and > > again probably warrants a full, logical, satisfying answer. > > > > Regards, > > > > Bill > > Everyone asks it at some point. I did once, and it was answered. I can't > remember the answer, but it satisfied me. I reckon you should dig up the > answer and put it in the "Things newcomers should know" list. It would be good > fodder for the FAQ, too. I think it would be a suitable FAQ question, but I'm not sure it's something newcomers need to know. Even as a relative non-newcomer, I don't think I've ever actually encountered a situation where TrueClass and FalseClass not having a common superclass mattered to me. I would tend not to put it on the same level as things like the absence of ++ or the other things on the newcomers list. David -- David Alan Black home: dblack@candle.superlink.net work: blackdav@shu.edu Web: http://pirate.shu.edu/~blackdav