No problem. I actually used to think that they were identical, which led to
some confusion. That's the only reason i point it out.
···
On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Alex Stahl <astahl@hi5.com> wrote:
Sorry, my wording was off. Understood that they're different methods.
I think of them synonymously, and so when I say "short for", I mean
that's my way of thinking about how they accomplish similar tasks, not
that "p" is literally a representation of "puts".Thanks for the clarification in any case.
On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 14:46 -0500, Colin Bartlett wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 8:40 PM, Quintus <sutniuq@gmx.net> wrote:
>
> > Am 02.09.2010 21:23, schrieb Alex Stahl:
> > > Ruby uses "puts", not "print". "p" is short for "puts".
> > > Try this:
> > > puts ary1
> > > You'll get the same results as:
> > > p ary1
> >
> >
> This is definitely wrong. #p is quite another method than #puts and yet
> > another than #print. Look at this ...
>
> And as another example of the differences:
> class P
> def inspect(); "P#inspect"; end
> def to_s(); "P#to_s"; end
> end
>
> q = P.new
> puts "p"
> p q #=> "P#inspect"
> puts "puts"
> puts q #=> "P#to_s"
> puts "print"
> print q
> puts ":: just after print"
> #=> "P#to_s:: just after print"