From: "BertramScharpf (Bertram Scharpf)" <software@...>
Date: 2013-11-24T01:31:04+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:58531] [ruby-trunk - Feature #9123] Make	Numeric#nonzero? behavior consistent with Numeric#zero?


Issue #9123 has been updated by BertramScharpf (Bertram Scharpf).


alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov) wrote:
> In my opinion, it is because code is intended mostly for reading, not for writing.
> 
>   a.sort {|a,b| (a.downcase <=> b.downcase).nonzero? || a <=> b }
> 
> is unexpected or confusing.

That's a matter of taste. In my eyes, this code example is beautiful and clear.
It could be more efficient using #casecmp instead of two #downcases, what you
clearly can see if it is one line.
----------------------------------------
Feature #9123: Make Numeric#nonzero? behavior consistent with Numeric#zero?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9123#change-43113

Author: sferik (Erik Michaels-Ober)
Status: Open
Priority: Normal
Assignee: 
Category: 
Target version: 


Numeric#zero? returns true or false, while Numeric#nonzero? returns self or nil.

I've written a patch that fixes this inconsistency and adds a Numeric#nonzero (non-predicate) method that returns self or nil for chaining comparisons. I'd like for this to be included in Ruby 2.1.0.

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/452.patch


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/