|
|
Posted by Gary L. Burnore on 01/06/08 23:26
On Sun, 06 Jan 2008 18:26:30 GMT, A Bit Narked <anonymous@example.com>
wrote:
>Can someone explain the rationale - if there is one - behind
>treating the constants TRUE and FALSE differently?
>
>echo false ;
>echo false+false ;
>echo intval(false) ;
>echo '"'.false.'"' ;
>
>echo true ;
>echo true+true ;
>echo intval(true) ;
>echo '"'.true.'"' ;
>
>should produce
>
>000"0"121"1"
No, it shouldn't. Perhaps if you could get past this bad assumption
it would help?
Try googling for the word boolean as others have suggested.
Go try the following in perl and see what happens. It won't be what
you expect either. You can then go complain to the people who USE
perl like you're complaining here.
print "True: " . true . "\n";
print "False: " . false . "\n";
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|