Re: new "empty" value/type in Lua?

[Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@...>]

On 02/07/2013 02:41, Tim Hill wrote:
> omg DON'T get me started on *that* mess (grin).
>
> Even the !FALSE trick doesn't work:
>
> if (x == TRUE)…
> if (x) …
>
> Still give different results

This proves again that if you try to use booleans, you better use them as booleans, ie. in 
the second style.

In Java too, I groan when I see

if (b == true)

because it is verbose, distracting, redundant.
And I saw many newbies just forgetting the difference between = and ==:

if (b = true)

and wondering why the test doesn't work. In Java, that's the only case where an assignment 
in a test is legal. In C, it can be worse...

Now, I agree that

if (!b)

isn't super-readable, alas. That's where the choice of ~ for negation is good, it stands 
out more... :-)

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