# Re: TrueClass/FalseClass vs. Boolean

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-trueclass-falseclass-vs-boolean/93359>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [March 31, 2006, 5:45pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-trueclass-falseclass-vs-boolean/93359 "2006-03-31T17:45:58Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BergerS\_Daniel](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@BergerS\_Daniel](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/BergerS_Daniel)\
**Post date:** [March 31, 2006, 5:45pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-trueclass-falseclass-vs-boolean/93359/1 "2006-03-31T17:45:58Z")

</div>

> -----Original Message-----  
> From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)]  
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2006 8:36 AM  
> To: ruby-talk ML  
> Subject: Re: TrueClass/FalseClass vs. Boolean

Also, I like it for testing, when I want to test .kind\_of? and ensure  
that it’s either true or false.

> > It’s been proposed and rejected by Matz once already.
> 
> i seem to recall this… link? wonder why he rejected…

I originally proposed it on the old RCR site on [rubygarden.org](http://rubygarden.org). I  
believe you could find it on [http://www.rcrchive.net](http://www.rcrchive.net), but it appears to  
be down at the moment.

I think one of the reasons for rejecting it was that redefining how true  
or false behaved would cause havoc with the regular expression engine.  
But I think mostly he just didn’t see the need for a boolean class the  
ways things are now.

Regards,

Dan

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![BergerS\_Daniel](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@BergerS\_Daniel](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/BergerS_Daniel)\
**Post date:** [March 31, 2006, 6:07pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-trueclass-falseclass-vs-boolean/93359/2 "2006-03-31T18:07:14Z")

</div>

Hi –

On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Berger, Daniel wrote:

> > > It’s been proposed and rejected by Matz once already.
> > 
> > i seem to recall this… link? wonder why he rejected…
> 
> I originally proposed it on the old RCR site on [rubygarden.org](http://rubygarden.org). I  
> believe you could find it on [http://www.rcrchive.net](http://www.rcrchive.net), but it appears to  
> be down at the moment.

Ugh. I’ve been having DNS issues. I’ll try to fix it…

David

–  
David A. Black (removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid)  
Ruby Power and Light, LLC ([http://www.rubypowerandlight.com](http://www.rubypowerandlight.com))

“Ruby for Rails” chapters now available  
from Manning Early Access Program! [Ruby for Rails](http://www.manning.com/books/black)