Issue #7511 has been updated by rits (First Last). charliesome (Charlie Somerville) wrote: > It isn't something I can imagine would see much use. implication is very common, the presence or validity of something requiring some condition to hold. if a && b && c && (d => e) && (f => g) ... end is a lot more clear than if a && b && c && (d ? e : true) && (!f || g) ... end especially if some of a, b, c, d, e, f, g are non trivial expressions ---------------------------------------- Feature #7511: short-circuiting logical implication operator https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/7511#change-34420 Author: rits (First Last) Status: Open Priority: Normal Assignee: Category: Target version: I find I need logical implication (will use => here) in boolean expressions fairly often and even though a => b is equivalent to !a || b, this substitute is more difficult to read and make sense of in long expressions -- http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/