Why "ABCDE"[0] returns an integer instead of 'A' ?

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

SGksIEkgY2Fubm90IHVuZGVyc3RhbmQgaG93IGEgaGlnaCBsZXZlbCBsYW5ndWFnZSBhcyBSdWJ5
IGRvZXNuJ3QKaGFuZGxlIGEgc2ltcGxlIHRoaW5nIGFzIEMgZG9lcyB3aXRoIHN0cmluZ3M6Cgpp
biBDOgogIHN0cmluZyA9ICJBQkNERSIKICBzdHJpbmdbMF0KICA9PiAnQScKCmluIFJ1Ynk6CiAg
c3RyaW5nID0gIkFCQ0RFIgogIHN0cmluZ1swXQogID0+IDY1CgpXaHkgNjU/IGl0J3MgdGhlIEFz
Y2lpIHZhbHVlIG9mIEE6CiAgcHV0cyAiXHg2NSIKICA9PiAiZSIKClBEOiBJJ3ZlIHJlYWxpemVk
IHdoZW4gd3JpdHRpbmcgdGhpcyBtYWlsIHRoYXQgUnVieSAxLjkgYWxyZWFkeQppbXBsZW1lbnQg
dGhpcyAiZmVhdHVyZSIuCgotLSAKScOxYWtpIEJheiBDYXN0aWxsbwo8aWJjQGFsaWF4Lm5ldD4K

 

[Boris Schmid]

PD: I've realized when writting this mail that Ruby 1.9 already

implement this "feature".

string[0,1] and string[0].chr will do the trick for you while you're in
1,8

 

[Iñaki Baz Castillo]

MjAwOC81LzI2LCBCb3JpcyBTY2htaWQgPGJvcmlzQGJhZ29mc291bHMuY29tPjoKPiA+IFBEOiBJ
J3ZlIHJlYWxpemVkIHdoZW4gd3JpdHRpbmcgdGhpcyBtYWlsIHRoYXQgUnVieSAxLjkgYWxyZWFk
eQo+ICA+IGltcGxlbWVudCB0aGlzICJmZWF0dXJlIi4KPgo+ICBzdHJpbmdbMCwxXSBhbmQgc3Ry
aW5nWzBdLmNociB3aWxsIGRvIHRoZSB0cmljayBmb3IgeW91IHdoaWxlIHlvdSdyZSBpbgo+ICAx
LDgKClRoYW5rcywgZGlkbid0IGtub3cgdGhhdC4KCi0tIApJw7Fha2kgQmF6IENhc3RpbGxvCjxp
YmNAYWxpYXgubmV0Pgo=

 

[Robert Dober]

Hi, I cannot understand how a high level language as Ruby doesn't
handle a simple thing as C does with strings:

in C:
string =3D "ABCDE"
string[0]
=3D> 'A'

in Ruby:
string =3D "ABCDE"
string[0]
=3D> 65

Maybe because
a) in C 'A' =3D=3D 65
b) Ruby has different ways to get substrings, x[0,1] or x[0..0]
c) Matz thought it was a good idea
d) it makes lots of sense, unknown paradigms are not necessarily worse
than know ones.

However, IIRC Ruby1.9 will as you have said below tell the contrary

Why 65? it's the Ascii value of A:
puts "\x65"
=3D> "e"

because of
"e"[0] =3D=3D ?e && ?e =3D=3D 0x65,
what did you want to do with \x?

PD: I've realized when writting this mail that Ruby 1.9 already
implement this "feature".

Yup, obviously too many people were puzzled by this.
HTH
Robert

--=20
http://ruby-smalltalk.blogspot.com/

 

[Phil]

...

Why 65? it's the Ascii value of A:
puts "\x65"
=> "e"

because of
"e"[0] == ?e && ?e == 0x65,
what did you want to do with \x?

\x is for hexadezimal. 65 is indeed the (decimal) Ascii value of 'A'.
hex = dez
0x65 = 101
0x41 = 65

And therefore:
puts "\x41" => 'A'
puts "\x65" => 'e'

PD: I've realized when writting this mail that Ruby 1.9 already
implement this "feature".
...

BR Phil

 

[Robert Dober]

...

Why 65? it's the Ascii value of A:
puts "\x65"
=> "e"

because of
"e"[0] == ?e && ?e == 0x65,
what did you want to do with \x?

\x is for hexadezimal. 65 is indeed the (decimal) Ascii value of 'A'.
hex = dez
0x65 = 101
0x41 = 65

Thanks for correcting my error Philip
I should have written

"A"[0] etc.etc.

I got confused by the => e

R.

 

[Robert Dober]

Just forget it, I cannot take them apart anymore, LOL, sorry for the noise.

 

[7stud --]

Hi, I cannot understand how a high level language as Ruby doesn't
handle a simple thing as C does with strings:

in C:
string = "ABCDE"
string[0]
=> 'A'

in Ruby:
string = "ABCDE"
string[0]
=> 65

Why 65? it's the Ascii value of A:
puts "\x65"
=> "e"

Repeat after me: "Ruby does not get in your way. Ruby does not get in
your way."

 

[Ryan Davis]

c) Matz thought it was a good idea

matz changed his mind for 1.9:

% multiruby -e 'p "a"[0]'
VERSION = 1.8.4
CMD = ~/.multiruby/install/1.8.4/bin/ruby -e 'p "a"[0]'

97

RESULT = 0

VERSION = 1.8.5
CMD = ~/.multiruby/install/1.8.5/bin/ruby -e 'p "a"[0]'

97

RESULT = 0

VERSION = 1.8.6-p114
CMD = ~/.multiruby/install/1.8.6-p114/bin/ruby -e 'p "a"[0]'

97

RESULT = 0

VERSION = 1.9.0-1
CMD = ~/.multiruby/install/1.9.0-1/bin/ruby -e 'p "a"[0]'

"a"
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

RESULT = 0

VERSION = rubinius
CMD = ~/.multiruby/install/rubinius/shotgun/rubinius -e 'p "a"[0]'

97

RESULT = 0

TOTAL RESULT = 0 failures out of 5

Passed: 1.8.4, 1.8.5, rubinius, 1.8.6-p114, 1.9.0-1
Failed:

 

[Robert Dober]

matz changed his mind for 1.9:

I hope his new one will be as brilliant as was his old one !
R.

 

[Ryan Davis]

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 7:52 AM, Ryan Davis <ryand-

I hope his new one will be as brilliant as was his old one !

yeah... well... in this case, his new mind breaks more of my code than
anything else.