What about "no" XOR 0? That's a false statement, while "no" NEQ 0 is true. If CF were a strongly typed language and you could enforce the "boolean-ness" of the operands, then it'd be true, but that's not the case. XOR coerces it's operands to boolean, while NEQ doesn't.
cheers, barneyb On 11/3/05, Claude Schneegans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>real world example where you would need a statement like this? > > Not really, actually, because (a XOR b) is equivalent to (a NEQ b) which > is much more intuitive. > -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] 360.319.6145 http://www.barneyb.com/ Got Gmail? I have 100 invites. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:223132 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
