Re: Different shades of false

[Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@...>]

Dolan, Ryanne Thomas (UMR-Student) wrote:
> Exactly.  The only problem with nil/false is that people use these
> values incorrectly.  nil is by no means synonomous with false, so it
> makes sense that nil ~= false.  Being false and not defined are two
> very different states.
>
> And the proposal that all types should have true/false values seems
> strange to me, as anything with true/false evaluations is by
> definition a boolean, which Lua of course already has.  Would it make
> sense at all if "" == 0?

That's why PHP introduced (in PHP 4.0) the equivalence operators:
if ("" == 0) // TRUE...
if ("" === 0) // FALSE, this operator means "if equal and of same type"

> So long as you take the convention that nil means something like
> "undefined" then everything makes sense the way it is.

I agree.

--
Philippe Lhoste
--  (near) Paris -- France
--  http://Phi.Lho.free.fr
--  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --