In message "Re: Local variables & blocks"
    on 03/02/03, matz writes:

>|  I say again, double meaning may be harmful.
>Double meaning?  Which and which?

  nil and false.
  I'm sorry, my prvious article was very unkindness one.

  So,

> We have nil from the beginning.

"non-initialized => false" is a part of the Ruby's policy and you think
there is no need to redesign, isn't it? So, I'll withdraw my opinion,
at least in ruby.

  Maybe, I have over reactioned to the words "reasonable" and
"save additional test". Usually, I cannot belive those words.



Thanks.

----
1002.(ichimal)
SUZUKI Shingo