Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Two cases:
ruby-1.9.2-p180 > puts {}.class
=> NilClass
and
ruby-1.9.2-p180 > puts "a".class
String
=> nil
It looks like puts {}.class is equivalent to (puts {}).class and puts "a".class is equivalent to puts ("a".class). Why is it so?
It’s treating
{}as a block, not as a hash. RubyInside says so, and also shows how you can prove it using Ripper.