Integer(nil) versus Float(nil) versus String(nil)

  • Thread starter Christoffer Sawicki
  • Start date
C

Christoffer Sawicki

Dear Rubyists,

def x() yield rescue :error end

[ x { Integer(nil) }, x { Float(nil) }, x{ String(nil) } ]
# => [0, :error, ""]

Isn't that a bit inconsistent?

Cheers,
 
R

Robert Klemme

Christoffer said:
Dear Rubyists,

def x() yield rescue :error end

[ x { Integer(nil) }, x { Float(nil) }, x{ String(nil) } ]
# => [0, :error, ""]

Isn't that a bit inconsistent?

Is this better?

irb(main):003:0> nil.to_i
=> 0
irb(main):004:0> nil.to_f
=> 0.0
irb(main):005:0> nil.to_s
=> ""

Cheers

robert
 
R

Rick DeNatale

Christoffer said:
Dear Rubyists,

def x() yield rescue :error end

[ x { Integer(nil) }, x { Float(nil) }, x{ String(nil) } ]
# => [0, :error, ""]

Isn't that a bit inconsistent?

Is this better?

irb(main):003:0> nil.to_i
=> 0
irb(main):004:0> nil.to_f
=> 0.0
irb(main):005:0> nil.to_s
=> ""

Well, I'd say that it confirms that the original case is an inconsistency.
 
D

David Vallner

Christoffer said:
Dear Rubyists,

def x() yield rescue :error end

[ x { Integer(nil) }, x { Float(nil) }, x{ String(nil) } ]
# => [0, :error, ""]

Isn't that a bit inconsistent?

Cheers,

Probably.

<rant>
But my Java-addled brain makes me make damn sure nulls / nils don't come
anywhere near I expect actual data, like into collections or numbers. If
you don't rely on automagical conversion to work, it can't bite you if
it doesn't. Just code explicitly.
</rant>

The to_foo and #Foo() type conversion methods being different always
confuses the heck of me, which is why I get paranoid around them. Does
anyone have a link to some rationale for and explanation of the difference?

David Vallner
 
C

Christoffer Sawicki

Probably.

<rant>
But my Java-addled brain makes me make damn sure nulls / nils don't come
anywhere near I expect actual data, like into collections or numbers. If
you don't rely on automagical conversion to work, it can't bite you if
it doesn't. Just code explicitly.
</rant>

That's definitely a valid point, but slightly irrelevant.
The to_foo and #Foo() type conversion methods being different always
confuses the heck of me, which is why I get paranoid around them. Does
anyone have a link to some rationale for and explanation of the difference?

Integer/Float are usually considered to be the *strict* equivalents of
to_i/to_f. Try to feed them non-number strings and you'll see. I don't
know anything more about them though. :)

Anyway, I was a bit puzzled over these two things on Integer/Float:

1) Them accepting nil at all
2) The (IMHO) inconsistency

I can accept both things as they are, since nothing says they should
act the way I except them to, but I thought it could be good to bring
it up.

Cheers,
 
C

Christoffer Sawicki

Hello!

Well it is your thread but I understand and agree with David that the nil
(do not call it null on that list though ;)
in a conversion is troubeling.
I read him that way that by banning it a part of your inconsistency will go
away, do you agree?

Yes, I agree. (But the inconsistency is still there.) :)

Just for the record, I discovered the behaviour when using FasterCSV
(that emits nil for empty cells) and Integer(x) as a kind of
assertion.
Are they? So far I have never heared that claim.
http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Kernel.html#M002003 says the contrary.
I do not necessarily think that is good, but that is how it is documented.

When discussing this issue on #ruby-lang the general concensus was
that Integer/Float are indeed stricter versions of to_i/to_f. The
Pickaxe says "A call to Integer will work wonders (and will throw an
exception if the input isn't a well-formed integer)". I should also
note that the documentation for Kernel#Integer in the Pickaxe actually
has "Integer(nil) => 0" as an example.
Try to feed them non-number strings and you'll see.


No you will not, "x".to_i Integer("x")

"x".to_i => 0
Integer("x") # ArgumentError: invalid value for Integer: "x"

Isn't that just what I meant?
I too hope that behavior will go away.

Thanks,
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,734
Messages
2,569,441
Members
44,832
Latest member
GlennSmall

Latest Threads

Top