From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Anand Kumria Subject: Re: On boolean configuration variables... Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:41:45 +1000 Message-ID: <20060625154145.GT10850@progsoc.uts.edu.au> References: <7vy7vmviul.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jun 25 17:41:42 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FuWk0-0001S8-Nn for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 25 Jun 2006 17:41:41 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751453AbWFYPli (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jun 2006 11:41:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932427AbWFYPli (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jun 2006 11:41:38 -0400 Received: from incubus.progsoc.uts.edu.au ([138.25.6.7]:30630 "EHLO incubus.progsoc.uts.edu.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751453AbWFYPlh (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Jun 2006 11:41:37 -0400 Received: from wildfire by incubus.progsoc.uts.edu.au with local (Exim 4.50) id 1FuWk5-0006HS-KM; Mon, 26 Jun 2006 01:41:45 +1000 To: Johannes Schindelin Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: wildfire@progsoc.uts.edu.au X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on incubus.progsoc.uts.edu.au); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Jun 25, 2006 at 04:00:34PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 25 Jun 2006, Anand Kumria wrote: > > > Allowing 'yes' and 'no' to equal 'true' and 'false' respectively sounds > > pretty sane and user-friendly. > > > > Why wouldn't you want to do that? > > 'Cause you'd have to add "maybe", too ;-) > > Seriously, there is a subtle side to booleans, which is the reason that > they typically take on only "false" and "true": Consider the question "Is > the box not red?". If the answer is "yes", I do not know if "yes, the box > is red" or "yes, the box is not red". > > "true" and "false" are less ambiguous. "True, the box is red" and "true, the box is not red" are just as ambiguous. It is always ambiguous if you allow a qualifier. Cheers, Anand -- `When any government, or any church for that matter, undertakes to say to its subjects, "This you may not read, this you must not see, this you are forbidden to know," the end result is tyranny and oppression no matter how holy the motives' -- Robert A Heinlein, "If this goes on --"