Kaldrenon wrote:
> Hm...I'm not sure I like that it doesn't go the other way.

Wouldn't work.


> b === a checks if a is-a b, right?

Only if b is a class. If b is e.g. a range or an array, it checks whether b 
includes a. If b is a regex it checks whether b matches a. For many other 
things it's just the same as b==a.


> It wouldn't even necessarily break case statements, since the .===
> method would be part of all of the basic type classes (Fixnum/String/
> etc) and there's always .class

There's always .class, but that doesn't help you unless you assume that the
argument passed to === will always be a class, which it won't.


-- 
NP: Explosions in the Sky - Magic Hours
Ist so, weil ist so
Bleibt so, weil war so