On 8/24/06, David Vallner <david / vallner.net> wrote:
> Probably.
>
> <rant>
> But my Java-addled brain makes me make damn sure nulls / nils don't come
> anywhere near I expect actual data, like into collections or numbers. If
> you don't rely on automagical conversion to work, it can't bite you if
> it doesn't. Just code explicitly.
> </rant>

That's definitely a valid point, but slightly irrelevant.

> The to_foo and #Foo() type conversion methods being different always
> confuses the heck of me, which is why I get paranoid around them. Does
> anyone have a link to some rationale for and explanation of the difference?

Integer/Float are usually considered to be the *strict* equivalents of
to_i/to_f. Try to feed them non-number strings and you'll see. I don't
know anything more about them though. :)

Anyway, I was a bit puzzled over these two things on Integer/Float:

1) Them accepting nil at all
2) The (IMHO) inconsistency

I can accept both things as they are, since nothing says they should
act the way I except them to, but I thought it could be good to bring
it up.

Cheers,

-- 
Christoffer Sawicki
http://vemod.net/