Ka-Ping Yee <ping@lfw.org>: > But in the new scheme, there is a "blessed" Boolean type. Does this > make the other kinds of true and false less legitimate? No, in the sense that they will still work in boolean contexts. Yes, in the sense that there will now be a "real" boolean type, which is perhaps best thought of as the *only* boolean type, with other values being converted to booleans in certain contexts. > If not, then when is it more correct > to use Boolean values? When what you're representing is purely a boolean and nothing else. Just ask yourself "If I were writing this in Pascal (or some other language with a strong boolean type) would I declare it as a boolean?" The answer to that should be pretty clear in most cases. Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a | Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. | greg@cosc.canterbury.ac.nz +--------------------------------------+
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4