On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 13:43, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 00:47:31 +0900, Mohammad Khan <mkhan / lextranet.com> wrote:
> > compare this,
> > a.false?
> > with
> > a == false or a.class == FalseClass
> 
> I'm sorry, but I don't understand why you think you need this latter.
> 
> foo if (a == false)
> 
> is sufficient. If you don't like that, then you can do:
> 
> foo if (FalseClass === a)
> 
> They're equivalent.
> 
> I don't really see anything that is added in terms of readability or
> functionality by adding #true? and #false?.
> 
> -austin

Same way I can say,

a == nil or a.class == NilClass

why we have a nil? ?
of course, to have more readability.

--
Mohammad