Re: Different shades of false

["Alen Ladavac" <alenl-ml@...>]

Javier:
> i don't feel too strongly about this, but if anythng, i would prefer it to 
> be
> the other way around: the boolean type should have only one value: true.
> false would be a synonymous with nil.

That too is a very valid approach. But seeing the idea of two different 
falses being already accepted, it leads me to think that nil is losing 
ground as a logical value. In this situation, as usage of "foo ~= nil" to 
test for nonexistence is required already (i.e. "if foo" has lost its 
initial meaning), seems like adding more "falses" makes no harm.

Alen