Issue #9123 has been updated by sferik (Erik Michaels-Ober).


=begin
> The opposite of "zero?" is not "nonzero?" but "notzero?". If the method's name was "notzero?", one could call it an inconsistency. "nonzero?" is not a yes-no-question.
 
Nonzero means "not equal to zero". It means the exact same thing as "not zero". It most certainly is a yes-no question. How else would you answer the question (({5.nonzero?}))?

> And yes, you are proposing an inconsistency, because a lot of useful programs would no longer work.

I believe you're confusing the word "inconsistency" with "incompatibility". Is English not your native language or are you trolling?
=end
----------------------------------------
Feature #9123: Make Numeric#nonzero? behavior consistent with Numeric#zero?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9123#change-43045

Author: sferik (Erik Michaels-Ober)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


Numeric#zero? returns true or false, while Numeric#nonzero? returns self or nil.

I've written a patch that fixes this inconsistency and adds a Numeric#nonzero (non-predicate) method that returns self or nil for chaining comparisons. I'd like for this to be included in Ruby 2.1.0.

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/452.patch


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/