# Method proposition

hi all,
what do you think of these methods:

class TrueClass
def switch
false
end
end

class FalseClass
def switch
true
end
end

i think i could find some real use for this, though switch! would
probably
be even more useful…
greetings, Dirk.

Hi –

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Dirk M. wrote:

def switch
true
end
end

i think i could find some real use for this, though switch! would probably
be even more useful…

You don’t like “not”?

What would switch! do?

David

David A. Black
[email protected]

“Ruby for Rails”, from Manning Publications, coming April 2006!

hi,

You don’t like “not”?

hmm… guess i missed that

What would switch! do?

switch! would change self

greetings, Dirk.

hi again,

foobar=true
foobar=not(foobar)
doesn’t seem to work, while i can see purpose in that,

light_switch=false
light_switch.switch if dark==true

On 1/21/06, [email protected] [email protected] wrote:

end

You don’t like “not”?

What would switch! do?

True would become False. False would become True… Human sacrifice,
dogs and cats living together - mass hysteria!

Hi –

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Dirk M. wrote:

switch! would change self
So:

true.switch!
1 == 1 # false

?

David

David A. Black
[email protected]

“Ruby for Rails”, from Manning Publications, coming April 2006!

er, the global value ‘true’ is the only instance of TrueClass. so,
doing true.switch! would make true become false?

So then,
if 1 == 1
puts “hi”
end

Wouldn’t print anything?

that, on second thought, probably wouldn’t work, and the following would
have to be used:

light_switch=false
light_switch=light_switch.switch if dark==true

On 1/21/06, Dirk M. [email protected] wrote:

switch! would change self
er, the global value ‘true’ is the only instance of TrueClass. so,
doing true.switch! would make true become false?

So then,
if 1 == 1
puts “hi”
end

Wouldn’t print anything?

(I wouldn’t want to maintain your programs

On 2006.01.22 04:31, Dirk M. wrote:

that, on second thought, probably wouldn’t work, and the following would
have to be used:

light_switch=false
light_switch=light_switch.switch if dark==true

I think here is where a Symbol would be most fitting

light_switch = :off
light_switch = :on if dark?

E

On 21 Jan 2006, at 19:42, Eero S. wrote:

I think here is where a Symbol would be most fitting

light_switch = :off
light_switch = :on if dark?

I’d just like to point out that this now makes it 4 Ruby programmers
needed to change a lightbulb (or at least turn it on) so far in this
thread. Would anybody like to take a guess at how many it would have
taken in other languages?

Eero S. wrote:

Wouldn’t print anything?

light_switch = :off
light_switch = :on if dark?

I don’t get it…

light_switch = dark

should be the same as

light_switch=false
light_switch=light_switch.switch if dark==true

right? (and please don’t compare to ‘true’ if something is true, it
is already true, comparing it with true doesn’t change that - never)

also

light_switch = !light_switch

should ‘switch’ the switch, right?

puzzled, or did i missed the joke?

Simon

Hi –

On Sun, 22 Jan 2006, Dirk M. wrote:

hi again,

foobar=true
foobar=not(foobar)
doesn’t seem to work, while i can see purpose in that,

You would do:

x = (not x)

or

x = !x

David

David A. Black
[email protected]

“Ruby for Rails”, from Manning Publications, coming April 2006!

[email protected] writes:

You would do:

x = (not x)

Is it just me, or does the precedence of “not” horribly suck?

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.