James Britt wrote:
> you'll get a return value than can be interpreted as true or false
                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^

Bingo!  I don't want to restrict the return values of question-mark 
methods to only true and false because I see nothing special about 
'true' and 'false'.  In my mind, they are just objects that just happen 
to have some useful equivalents when evaluated in a boolean context. 
And that's the key point here: context.

Who cares what the type/class of an object really is, so long as the 
object can be *interpreted* in a meaningful way in the particular usage 
context?  Sounds like the fundamental concept of duck typing to me. :-)
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.