Gerardo Santana Góíez Garrido wrote:
> Chand Perrin wrote:
>> What would you expect it to return, and why would you think that should
>> be the expected behavior?
> 
> I'd expect the same behavior as FalseClass and TrueClass: undefined method.
> 
> Because if I want 0 would expect or send 0, not nil.to_i.
> Because it doesn't make sense to me that nil, which means false also,
> can be represented as zero, when zero doesn't mean false, but true.

Hmmm. Why would you convert a variable/parameter to int if you want to
use it in a boolean context, in the first place?...

Do you think that to_i is expected to keep the boolean meaning of
anything it's sent to, or throw an exception? I don't see why this would
ever be related to each other (to_i and boolean operations).

> mortee wrote:
>> Well, if you'd like it so much, why not just redefine it in your own
>> programs? Everyone else seems to expect it to return 0 instead of being
>> hostile by throwing an exception...
> 
> Oh, c'mon ...

For some weird reason, I don't *exactly* understand your counter-argument.

mortee