Re: false [was: The "Is nil present in a table" problem}

["Paul Chakravarti" <pc000@...>]

Edgar Toernig writes:
> But that would result in two classes of behaviour: one only accepts
> true and another that accepts anything but nil/false.  I'm not sure
> that I would like that... 

I am not sure I understand this concern - do you have an example ? 

I dont think that this impacts the semantics of relational
operators other than that it is possible to test a type and
tell that it is a 'true' value (from a relational opeartor) -
almost all other code could just ignore this - ie. following
the pattern from the proposal - 

- true/false are distinct types 

print(type(true)) = "true"
print(type(false)) = "false" 

- Relational operators return true/false 

5 > 6         ==> false
1 == 1        ==> true
nil == false  ==> false
1 == true     ==> false 

- Logical operators treat true as a non-nil type 

true and 10   ==> true
10 and true   ==> true
10 or true    ==> 10
10 and 11     ==> 11
nil or nil    ==> nil
not(true)     ==> false
not(1)        ==> false
not(false)    ==> true 

Regards, PaulC