Is this a bug in the defined? operator?

ruby-talk
1

From: matz@ruby-lang.org [mailto:matz@ruby-lang.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 7:39 PM
To: ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org
Subject: Re: Is this a bug in the defined? operator?

The behavior of the following code seems like a bug to me:

No, local variable scope is static, not dynamic, so that:

Aha.

I think what you want is

foo = false
[1, 2, 3, 4].each { |x|
if foo
puts “foo is set”
else
puts “foo not set”
foo = true
end
}

  					matz.

Actually, what I was going for in the first place that led me to this
observation was a quick-n-dirty three-state “boolean”: true, false, and
unknown. It seemed at the time that ‘defined?’ would get me the equivalent
of the unknown state.

Thanks for the quick response!

  • jeff
···

In message “Is this a bug in the defined? operator?” > on 02/06/05, “Gray, Jeff” jeff.gray@intel.com writes: