----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Alan Black" <dblack / candle.superlink.net>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk / ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2002 8:01 AM
Subject: RE: An example of the beauty of Ruby...


> Hi --
> 
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Rich Kilmer wrote:
> 
> > OK...about as nitpicking as it gets...
> 
> Don't flatter yourself :-)
> 
> > upload unless unchanged?
> >
> > Per the standard Rubyism of the question mark for Boolean methods.
> 
> OK, now I want to know why the non-? version doesn't bother me.
> I think it's because the name already denotes state, and therefore
> connotes Booleanism.  Or vice versa, or something.
> 
> As opposed to, say, var.nil, which without the question mark doesn't
> convey any kind of test.
> 
> To put it another way: there's nothing else, other than a true-false
> indicator, that "unchanged" could be (natural languagewisely
> speaking).

Actually, in this case, I did do it deliberately.

As David says, the name itself implies a Boolean. I like it 
better without the ?, even though normally I'd use one.

As for the double negative, that's just how my brain works...
it wasn't a conscious decision. I think I like it this way.
Or at least, I don't dislike it.  :) :)

Hal Fulton