Re: 3.0.3 - type boolean
Juergen Luethje wrote:
>
> Alex Caracatsanis wrote:
>
> [type boolean]
>
> > A serious, newbie question: why is this a useful type to check?
[snip]
> > Did this answer your question?
>
> Regards,
> Juergen
I think so Juergen. I understand you to say that by adopting your routine
we will have a "standard" way of declaring a variable of type boolean (which
is already inherent in some other languages, eg Java) and ensuring the
validity of a value we assign to it; and this would make our programs easier
to read and more logically consistent (ie "boolean" implies true/false,
whereas "integer" or "constant" can mean other things as well). Yes?
I hadn't thought of doing that. I've been using:
constant FALSE = 0
constant TRUE = 1
and assigning those values - eg setFlag = TRUE
I understand the basics of using variables as flags (but am pretty shakey
on using bits for this purpose).
And I thank you for the particular example you used - I didn't know how to
break out of nested loops using exit!
Regards
Alex Caracatsanis
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|